1
THE NEWFOUNDLANDER.
St. John's, Wednesday, February 17, 1869.
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY.
TUESDAY, Feb. 9.
House met pursuant to adjournment.
On motion of
Mr. GODDEN, the House resolved itself into Committee of the Whole on the
Address of thanks,
Mr. KNIGHT in the chair.
Mr. HOGSETT.—The section now before the
House was one of the most vital importance to
this country. It was important because it involved a right which had seen conceded
years ago,
by the Imperial Government, which had been
sanctioned by treaty, and which, only a few
months ago, had been ignored by a Colonial
Secretary of the name of Carnarvon. He (Mr.
H.) contended that it was the most important
clause in the Address. Before, however, he
went into the consideration of the question
he would refer to the whole of His Excellency's
speech. Now he had heard hon. members
speak of it as a glorious speech, as the most
wonderful one which had ever been delivered by
a Governor. It opened up such an expanse of
view, and suggested so many remedies that all
the Government members have fallen down on
their knees and worshipped it. Well now, we
have had a good deal said, session after session;
about Outport Steam. The Surveyor General
was a great supporter of Outport Steam. It
would be in his opinion the panacea for every
ill in Newfoundland. Every egg that would be
laid, in Bonavista; every lobster that was
caught along our coasts, every heifer that was
at the Northward, were to find their way o
the St. John's market by Outport Steam. Poverty was not to be know. Well, we have
no
steam consuunication now, and there was not
a word about it in the speech. The little
"Ariel" was lying in the harbor motionless.
Now do the Government mean to abandon Outport steam communication? Do they mean to
forsake their first love. They were silent upon
the subject, and are we then wrong in saying
that they are a party of do-nothings who thus
allow their own offspring to perish. Now that
was the first omission in the speech. Now we
had been paying for some years past seven or
eight hundred a year for a Geological survey
of the Island. Is there a single word about the
exploration? No not one word. What did this
show? Why that the Executive were lax in their
duty in not knowing what their employee was
about. There was not even a report from
that
gentleman, and hence the Government are unable to congratulate the country on the
expenditure that had been made for this service. But
the public had an opinion upon this matter, and
that was that the Dominion Government were
in possession of that information which we
should of right have. Leaving the Geological
survey, he would now refer to the St. John's
Hospital. There was not a man that entered
that building but got infected with typhus
fever. The matter had been brought before
the Executive two years ago, and a promise had
been made by the Government that it would be
intended to, and yet it never had been. These
were some of the dilemmas upon which we hang
the Government. They bad left not a single
monument, a mark of progress during their
administration, except the mark which is ever
seen in the lace of a man, fed upon Indian meal
and molasses. The only promise which the Government made was the one they made to
themselves, to receive their salaries every quarter
day. Here the hon. member referred to that
portion of the Speech relative to the Reciprocity
Treaty, and said that a more insulting paragraph
had never been seen in a Governor's speech,
addressed to a deliberative Assembly. We had
got Reciprocal Free Trade bafore, and when
there was no New Dominion, and we could get
it again at the present moment. If we were
merely in this House to obey Imperial behests,
what was the use of a Representative form of
Government, and telling the people that we
could do this that and the other thing? This
then was the great speech which after four years
they had come down with, and expect the public to endorse. The time was not far distant
when, the people would be fully alive to the
way in which they had been deluded. The
whole burden of this speech was Confederation,
Confederation, Confederation. Then we
come to the next insult that had been offered,
and that was the clause referring to the French
Shore. Here the hon member read the clause
and continued. This House did not delegate
His Excellency to go to England, any more than
they did the hon. Receiver General. He went
there of his own motion, and he botched the
matter, and if he wishes now to throw dust in
the eyes of the people, this House should meet
him on the threshold, and put the public, or at
least those of them, who may be inclined to
invest money on that part of the coast, on their
[?], before they place themselves in a position
in which they cannot protect themselves, and in
what His Excellency may not be able to help them,
because he will be far away. If his Grace informed His Excellency there was only one
way in
which it could be done with courtesy to the Governor and to the Colony, and that did
not appear
to have been adopted. "I am informed" says
his Excellency, that his Grace sees no reason
why grants should not be sanctioned in the interior of the island. Go where the good
niggers go;
where the aborogines used to dwell, long, long
ago, and dig and delve,and when mines are found,
you dare not bring your minerals to the sea shore.
His Excellency goes on, "provided that no right
is granted which will enable buildings to be erected on the strand, or which would
cause the French
to apprehend any interruption to the full enjoyment by them of any of the privileges
belonging
to their Fishery rights." This was the grand
boon, the great work accomplished by his Excellency during his four months' absence
from the
Colony. The matter stands exactly as it did last
session. It is not one whith advanced. The
French are just as secure in their rights, and the
difficulty of working mines by British subjects on
British soil is as great as when that celebrated
despatch to which his Excellency alludes was
written. The policy indicated in that despatch is
emphatically declared by his Excellency to be the
policy of the British Government, and it we are
to believe his Excellency, it remained unaltered
up to the time he left England. That despatch
read as follows:—
DOWNING STREET,
7th December, 1866.
SIR.—I have had under my consideration your
Despatch No. 116, of the 8th August, 1866, reporting
your return from a visit to the South and West
Coasts of Newfoundland, and communicating to me
the impressions you derived from the journey.
I have also received from you a more recent despatch, enclosing a memorial from Mr.
C. F. Bennett,
who appears to have been engaged in searching for
Minerals on the West Coast of Newfoundland.
Mr. Bennett does not see n to be fully aware that
some of the conclusions which have been advocated
from time to time by the British Government in
relation to the French Shore, and to its neighboring
waters, have never been admitted by the Government of France, and that it is the difference
which
has hitherto existed on these points between the two
Governments which creates a difficulty in dealing
with the Coasts of Newfoundland in the manner
most calculated to develope the resources of the
Colony. Her Majesty's Government much regret
the unsettled state of this question, and the serious
inconvenience to which this leads. But it would be
a far graver evil to embroil the Government of England in a dispute with that of France
on the grounds
which a careful consideration of existing Treaties did
not clearly justify. They are unable, therefore, to
treat as decided questions which are really matter of
controversy. They would, however, most readily
re-open the negotiations with the French Government, which were broken off in 1861,
if only satisfied
that there were a reasonable prospect of bringing
them to a successful termination. Meanwhile, pending the settlement of the questions
of French and
British rights on the coast, I am unable to authorize
the appointment of a British Magistrate on the socalled French Shore, nor have I any
alternative but
to instruct you, for the present, not to make any
grants of land on that Coast.
There is no doubt that the provisions of the existing Treaties, as they stand, are
ill adapted to meet
the real exigencies either of the French Fishermen
or of the Newfoundlaud Colonists; and might be
greatly modified for the advantage of both parties.
And I should gladly resume negotiations with a view
to such a modification; but I think it necessary to
add that any such negotiations must be attended
with considerable difficulty, so long as it is liable to
be disturbed by unforeseen objections on the part of
the Colony.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your most obedient humble servant,
(Signed,) CARNARVON.
Governor Musgrave, &c., &2., &c.
That is the despatch which his Excellency tells us
is kept intact, and that its principles still actuato
the British Government. What does the Governor
say "In anticipation of the formal agreement,
which has been proposed to the French Government. I have been acquainted by His Grace
the
late Secretary of State that he approve; of the
policy indicated in Lord Carnarvon's Despateh at
the 7th December 1863, that no action should be
taken which could in any way be construed into for
interference with the French in their fishery rights.
Was not that a re-echo of the despatch. Lord
Cardarvon does not say that grants shall not be
issued of the interior, but only that he his "no
alternative but to instruct you tor the present not
to make any grant of land on that coast." Was
not that the Whole question between this Legislature and the Imperial Government?
What then
has his Excellency done? What better position
has he placed us in? He (Mr. H.) did not think
he need point the House to the addresses and resolutions aud debates and the stern
opposition given
to the despatch of Lord Carnarvon. We are told
we may go into the interior, but must not come
near the coast. We might as well be told we could
dig into the bowels of the earth like moles. Was
this namby pamby speech, the only reply to
house was to have to its resolutions and addresses?
Common courtesy should at all events dictate an
acknowledgment of the receipt of our despatches.
How are we treated in this matter? So as to
approach the Imperial Government with all due
respect and with words of loyalty, but yet breathing our deep feelings of grievances
on this subject.
We sent home joint addresses, which went through
the usual channel, and yet we have received no
reply to them, at least from the only proper source
from which the reply should come, that is to say
from the office of the Secretary of State for the
colonies. There had been no modification of the
Carnarvon policy, it still stood out in bold relief
[?] the people of the Colony. Written
not in letters of gold but of disgrace, and deeply
imprinted in the minds of the people. It was nonsense to talk of issuing grants where
the foot of
no white man, not even our sainted Geologist
had ever trod. Our people would perish there as
certainly as they would in the wild woods of
Canada, where they are to be sent to work at
Railways. If hon. gentlemen, who call themselves patriots and say they have the interest
of
the country at heart, can be content with such
myths as these, all others could do was to pity
them, to try to arouse them, aul if they cannot
iupel them in a right direction, to appeal to the
people whose voice they must hear and whose
opinions they must respect. Though in the struggle between the French and English
Governments,
the French should have the best of it, was this
House to ignore the rights of the people of the
Colony? It the British Government commit a
wrong, why let them. Let this House at all events
discharge its duty to the people. Why should the
House be called on to congratulate the Government or any delegate in a question which
by
his own acknowledgement is still open? The
British Government is only about to submit terms
to the French. Are thes terms agreed on between them? Are they not still going on
with
negotiations. When we are still without that
reply to which as a Representative body we are
entitled, are we to take the ips dixit of any man
who choses to go on a rambling excursion? This
House is not dead yet, nor is the country killed
out yet, neither are our representative institutions
yet worn out, and though hon. gentlemen with
large salaries may find it difficult to stem the difficulties which surround them.
Yet though poor
as the people are, their skeleton forms will rise up
assert their rights, show their power and beat their
opponents. The hon. and learned gentlemen concluded by moving the following amendment.—
[Here the hon member read the Amendment, and
moved its adoption.]
Hon. A. SHEA.—The matter before the chair
had reference to a question of very great importance. He had no fault to find with
the way
in which the hon. and learned gentleman who
spoke last treated it. But he (hon. Mr. S.)
differed with him in his conclusions. To hear
him, one would suppose that we were in a posiion to determine this question for ourselves.
This question was a very old one, and had been
matter of consijeration for almost every legislature which had sat in the Colony.
It is a matter
on which the British Government alone can
pronounce definitively. There were two parties concerned; and as far as could be seen
by
the correspondence, they had not arrived at any
conclusions by which the exercise of their rights
should be defined. It was well known that this
was a subject which was always approached,
with great tenderness by the British Government. Fiance attached great importance
to these,
fisheries, and in the absence of any clear definition
of their right, Great Britain was not in disposed to a compromise which might laid
to such a
definition. The subject was brought before the
House last session, and petitions to Parliament
and to the Imperial Government were adopted.
There was much difference of opinion as to the
expediency of this course, and it was the opinion
of many that it would not be wise to bring the
matter before Parliament. Parliament, they
thought, would be unwilling to take any extreme course in the matter, and the effect
of
elicisting the opinion of Parliament would be to
relieve the Executive of the day from any responsibility it might feel in view of
the representations of this House. As the event shewed,
they were justified in their anticipations.
British statestmen say that they cannot proceed
in the question with too much care, that the interests of the Empire are in a measure
involved
with it, and that they are not prepared to risk a
war with France for its settlement. It was idle
to suppose that the British Government would,
for any interest of our jeopardise their good relations with France; and it would
be unreasonable
in one part to expect it. The result of our application was that it did not place
the matter in
any favourable light. There was not a man in
Parliament who would support the Colonial
view, for they all regarded the matter in an
Imperial light, aad said it would be impolite
and dangerous to carry out our views. It was
a false move on our part to give them such an
opportunity of pronouncing on the matter. It
had been stated that his Excellency had no
authority from this House to visit England and
enter into negotiations on this matter. His
Excellency was not responsible to this House,
and did not for a moment suppose he was acting
under its authority. It was by the special instructions of the imperial Government
he visited
England. The Government supposed that one
who took such a deep interest in the question,
and had written so ably on it, would be of valuable assistance in its settlement;
and on that
account and that alone, and independently of
this House, he went home. He is not responsible to this House, nor is the Imperial
Government responsible to this House, for the course
they may pursue respesing this matter. The
Imperial Government felt that we were largely
interested in this matter, and they had exhibited
every disposition to meet the views of the people
of the Colony. But when asked to do that
which would conflict with their policy towards
France they demurred. It was perfectly
idle to imagine that any consideration for our
interests would ever induce them to abandon
their Imperial policy. He (hon. Mr. S.) did
not say that we should lie down quietly and, as
the expression was, "accept the situation." He
thought it would be advisable to jog the memory of the Imperial Government, to induce
them
to use every means consistent with their avowed
policy, for the delimite settlement of our rights.
Though we have not accomplished all we aimed
at, nor obtained such a settlement of the question as would enable the Government
to issue
clear grants, we have nevertheless acquired a
very in portant advantage, which would enable
parties requiring tracts of land to obtain these
lands, and work them virtually free from all
these obstructions with which the letter of the
law might seem to encumber them. This advantage was owing entirely to the personal
exertions of the Governor, who had a this metter
displayed an ability and a zaal which entiled
him to the gratitude of every man who was in
terested in the welfare of the Colony. Under
the authority obtained by His Excellency,
power resides in him to issue grants of land, not
exactly upon the sea coast, but more or less
inland. No practical difficulty will obstruct the
issue of three out of every four grants applied
for on that shore. No Government could over
turn the law of the treaties. No law could
authorize the issue of any grants invading the
occupation of any part of the sea coast which
is reserved to the French; and such grants
would necessarily be construed as an infraction
of their treaty rights. Therefore, in an any
grants that may be issued, a reservation will be
made against the erection of any buildings upon
the sea coast, though it was not at all likely
that parties would be necessitated to adhere to a
this condition, as the greater number of applications are for land upon that part
of the coast
where the French do not fish; and where
already British subjects reside, against the
letter of the treaties, but altogether unobstructed by the French. Already some very
important grants have been issued to parties who,
acquainted with the premises, are perfectly willing to take them with all the conditions.
No
doubt the subject would, in time, be satisfactorily dealt with, so that these things
which we
have now, by sufferance, would be confirmed as
legal rights. Our proceedings of last year
were doubtless perfectly well intended, but he
(hon. Mr. S.) could not but repeat the opinion
which he then expressed, that it was a grand
mistake for us to go to the Imperial parliament.
We merely enabled the Government of the day a
to make a pronouncement that they would do
nothing by which the Imperial relations with
France might be disturbed. And it was unwise
in us to call on a discussion which would necessarily have the effect of producing
that expression of opinion. This was no case in which
Parliament would bring pressure upon the
Government. It was a matter of international
obligation, approached on all sides with great
caution, and Parliament could not but approve
of the course of reticence which the ministry
adopted. He (hon. Mr. S.) could not see the
necessity of introducing in the speech from year
to year a mention of the Geological Survey,
which has now become a mere matter of routine.
As to the suspicion that the Report of the
Geologist is better known in Canada than here
it is most unfounded. Mr. Murray was a gentleman who had always most religiously respected
the obligatious which he owed to the local
Government. He (hon. Mr. S.) was personally
acquainted with the fact that in Cauada complaints were made of Mr. Murray's reticence,
so that his intimate friends had sought from
him (hon. Mr. S.) information on the commonest affairs. Sir W. Logan is Mr. Murray's
superior, and his (Mr. Murray's) relations require
him to report to Sir Willian in the first place. In
that professional course which these proceedings
require, they have to pass through his hands before being communicated to us; and
he (hon.
Mr. S.) believed that they were just as religiously raspected as it he were the sworn
servant
of the Colony. Supposing however that this
suspicion were correct, do we care that all the
world should know our resources? Would it
not, as a matter of fact, be hightly desirable that
the attention of others should be directed to
those resourses which, og ourselves, we cannot
develop. He would not justify Mr. Murray
if he were to allow Canada to anticipate us
with this information; but wrong as it might be
in him, the results could not be otherwise than
advantageous to ourselves. The hon. member
had referred to the introduction of the reciprocity question into the speech, and
had commented upon a remark of his (hon. Mr. S.) which
was not open to dispute. When he referred to
the subject he had said that it was incidentally
introduced. That was perfectly true, but
nevertheless the question aross as a matter of
prominent consideration in connection with
Coufederation. Reciprocity could not be obtained without the intervention of those
agencies
which under Confederation would be brought
into play, at least until house members oppsite
introduce that plan which has been heraldad
with such a flourish of trumpets. We had
had eleven years experience of recprocity; and
we had found it greatly to our advantage. The
proprosition of the hon. member, Mr. Glen, as
to reciprocal duties, could hardly carry the
slightest weight with it. We must know too
that even if we were in a position to dispense
with duties on the necessaries of life, it
was only turo' the Imperial or the Dominion
Government that we could obtain a renewal of
the treaty. We were not in the position of a
great negotiating power, and it we fancied so
we should only place ourselves in the ridiculous
position of the wiseacres ot Prince Edward
islaud. Hon. gentleman ought to be ashamed
of themselves to talk at this time of day of
reciprocal duties of 5 per cent. Such terms
would never be proposed by the other Provinces, and the British GOvernment will permit
no piebald policy. This allusion then had been
properly iutroduced into the speech in the
position it occupied, as an incidental matter
powerfully bearing upon the main question.
Independently of this, to his (hon. Mr. S's)
mind, the main question had sufficient attractions of its own. Reciprocity however
is one
of those things, which under Confederation
we are certain to gain, and it therefore occupied in the speech that place to which
[?]
prominence and its importance
[?] led
[?]
2
THE NEWFOUNDLANDER.
Mr. TALBOT approved of the amendment
which had been put forward by the hon. member, M. Hogsett. It stated what was perfectly
correct. Now the speech of his Excellency the
Governor had been viewed in different lights.
Some hon. members had praised it with no light
praise, others had criticised it severely. So if he
(Mr. T.) took a middle course, he thought he
would be near the mark. It was by no means
an extraordinary speech; but it was not wholly
destitute of matters of considerable interest. It
was one of those kind of speeches usually delivered at the opening of each session
of this House,
fairly written, and fairly delivered. But in
important matters there was an almost entire
absence of decision, of a clearly defined policy;
which we all must regard as not very complemantary to this House. A speech from the
throne was always supposed to define a specific
policy. Now in this speech there were references
made to certain matters properly enough; but
there was no course of policy defined for the
Government to pursue. Now when the present
Government came into power, a speech somewhat similar to the present, one had been
addressed to this Assembly; and in that the
Government did think it necessary to say what
they intended to do, in order to restore the
country from its deplorable condition, and to
moving it forward in the career of improvement.
The policy then put forth was the encouragement
and improvement of Agriculture; and in persuance of that a Bill was introduced and
passed,
having that end for its object,as well as the reduction of pauperism. At the time
this measure
was under discussion, he (Mr. T.) had given
it as his opinion that it would be productiv of no
good. Well, the Bill was passed, came into
operation,and we now find that it has been powerless to effect those results which
the Government predicted, but which were never anticipated
by this side of the House. Pauperism, so far
from receding, had advanced; so far from being
checked, it had been accelerated; so that our
present position was really worse than when
this great curative measure was so triumpuantly
usherd in. Now that was one point which
should be distinctly remembered. In that
policy, then, Government had failed. Well,
if we judge them by their failures, we cannot
have much hope for their capacity to do any
good. We had watchad carefully their proceedings, and we had watched the operation
and working of this measure with pecaliar caution. He (Mr. T.) had taken the Government
at its word. They said they were the greatest
men in the country. He said granted. They
said they would accomplish what had never
been done before. He said granted. They
said they possessed the collective wisdom of the
country. He said granted. The said they
were the Goliaths of this Colonial Parliament.
He said granted. They said they were the only
representatives of the public. He said granted. They said they would never fail. He
said
doubtful. Well, all their sayings had come to
nothiag, and his doubts had been verified.
They were evidently impressed with the belief
that it was impossible for any body of men to
rule this country; because they would not and
could not confess their own inability to do it,
their own inability to grapple with the difficulties
that surrounded them. They would doubtless
assert that because they failed, it was impossible for others to succeed. Now what
had
they tried to do? Their first essay was to destroy pauperism; and how did they try
to effect
that purpose? By saying to a pauper go into
the woods and clear land,and for the first acre
you clear we will give you $8, and for every
one after the first, $9. This they said to a
man without any means at his control, without
being able to buy a loaf of bread, a pick-axe to
work with, or the means to erect a dwelling to
live in. At the time it was proposod he (Mr.
T.) said it was impossible to succeed, as it was,
that the Government must surely mean to do
something more, must give them roads, must
try to sustain them, or if not, we are only mocking the miseries of the poor. Well;
the Bill
had become, as he (Mr. T.) anticipated, a perfect failure. But did they do anything
else?
Having failed in this instance, did they look
around and see if they could devise any means
that would be beneficial? Did they encourage
those who had cultivated the land, but who,
from poverty, were unable to work it? There
were hundreds of acres of cultivated land which
has been lying idle for years. Did they woo
the people to recover it from its present wilderness state, and make their support
dependent
upon the culture of the soil? No. You
made them believe they would get their
support from you, and thus you
degraded them. Pauperism increased, and pauper
Relief expenditure increased. No effort was made
to check it until the eleventh hour. He contended
that when the Government desired to check this system, they should have done so by
degrees, and not
at one full bound. It would appear that the Premier
felt his embarrassed situation, and his inability to
stem the tide of corruption and malversation of the
public funds. His only desire was to save himself,
protect, if possible, his Government, and depend on
luck for the result. The monster pauperism was
not to be killed but by one blow; but was to be
gradually weakened. Then there was another evil
quite sufficient to crush the country of itself, increased
taxation. Their reasoning in support of that was
that they could not support the people without
facing additional burdens upon their backs.
Your burdens, say they, are heavy, but we'll cure
them by putting on heavier ones. Now would any
one say that these two measures were calculated to
benefit the county, though they were put forward
for that purpose? They either did it for an evil
purpose, or else because they were unabled to rule
the country. We are told that this increase of taxation was inevitable, and had been
universally approved of by the country. Here the hon. member referred at length to
the late election at Harbor Grace,and
contended that the question of Confederation had
never been put to the people, who were perfectly
indifferent whom they returned this session, knowing
that the question would come before them for final
decision at the general election. The fact that only
one half of the electors votes, probed this. Then
we had a new policy ushered in, the all abording
one of Confederation. That was the policy that
was shadowed forth in his Excellency's speech, two
years ago, and every hon. member was aware of
what then occurred. A paragraph had been smuggled into the address, which it was afterwards
alleged affirmed the principle of Confederation.
Hon. members who had voted for it were in a state
of great excitemant. They solemnly repudiated in
this House that they had intended to affirm any
such principle. They'd clared that they were opposed to Confederation on any terms,
How men
then could so change their minds without any reason,
he (Mr. T.) was a loss to imagine. We are surrounded by the same circumstances now
as we were
then. Yet we are told that those who had before
expressed their opinion to be that no circumstances
would justify Union with Canada, are now most
anxious that very Union should be accomplished
It was said, but he (Mr. T.) did not know whether
it was true or not, that the Government feel they
are in such a position that they cannot retrieve
themselves. They are in such a condition
of governmental misery, that they cannot
retrieve their position, and rather than give
way, rather than permit toher men to seize
the helm, they would abandon the country and
let it drift into a Union with Canada, provided
only, that they should drift with it, and have the
iron chest still with them. Next session, that was
the last session, they had another speech, and
it was remarkable that the politics of the two
former sessions were dropped, and the third
policy was a policy of taxation. We were told
that the country was in a very bad state, Agriculture had effected no good. Confederation
was
senuted, and Taxation only remained—and certainly taxes were piled on. It was said
this was
really a policy, and that its object was to prove to
the country that it would not be worse off by going
into Confederaion. One objection made to confederation was that the Canadian Tariff
was very
high, and the policy was to make the tariff of the
country as high as that of Canada, and thus remove
that objection, and, as it proved, hon. gentlemen
opposite swallowed the bait. Did it strike them
that though the Tariff of the country may be pretty
much as is the Canadian Tariff, if we should be
confederated it will be kept as its present rate, if
not made higher, and we will have lost all control
over it. It may be asked how can we lessen it
now? It never appears to strike hon. gentlemen
that the expenditure could be brought down a little.
When it was proposed to increase taxation, the
hon. gentlemen on his (Mr. T's.) side of the House
suggested a reduction of the expenditure instead,
but they were not listened to. In their simplicity
they thought that by reducing the expenditure they
would be able to avoid increased taxation, and do
many, things which would tend to advance the
interests of the country and the comfort of the
people. They fancied that it would well to act
as honest individuals surrounded by financial difficulties would to do, that is to
retrench and live in a
less luxurious and expensive stylem and thus by
making income and expenditure square, get rid of
difficulties and be independent. This is the fourth
session, and they had again the old policy of the
second session, and were asked to adopt Confederation, as that was the only thing
which would improve the condition of the country. Of course they
would have that question before them bye and bye.
He (Mr. T.) was of opinion, and he thought the
country was of the same, that the only thing they
required was retrenchment. The public believed
that the expenses are excessive, and that some
£20,000 or £30,000 a year, might easily be saved,
and applied for the public benefit. Men in office
say, such a saving would be worth nothing, that it
would not give sixpence all round, and what good
would that effect? Why it would give £100,000 to £120,000 in four years, and in a
small
community like this, if such a sum were judiciously
and properly expended, there need not be a poor
man in the country. The people were now in a
transition state, from the time in which the fisheries
were able to support them for the whole year round,
to the time when they do not give sufficient for their
support during the summer. If that £100,000 were
avaliable now, it would be sufficient to tide them
over their difficulties, and establish them in a course
of industry which would render them prosperous and
happy. He (Mr. T.) believed that this saving
might be accomplished, at all events it was worth
trying, and if it failed, if being judiciously applied it
did not tide the people over the difficulties if it did
not help to aid the fishermen in the establishing agricultural pursuits to aid the
fisheries, then let us have
Confederation or anything else. Before you take a
step which will plunge you into irretrievable Union,
try it. It is better than parting with your libery
your poverty, and possibly with your lives. It was
not because people were surrounded by poverty
that they should part with their liberties and rights.
and link themselves to another country which had
no sympathy with them. No country was so discordant as Canada, which was made up of
so many
antagonistic elements and races. He (Mr. T.)
said it would be wise to pasuse and try all feasible
things before surrendering themselves in that way.
The question just before the House was that of the
French Shore rights. He had heard it said by
some one on the Government benches, that we had
gained a great privilege. He could not see it in
that light or that they were one bit better off. The
treaties remained exactly as they were. How then
was is possible to say that they were better off or
had more privledges than before? No conclusion
had yet been come to, so things remained as they
were last year, and ever since the treaties were
made. The Government blundered most tremendously when they refused licenses two years
ago.
The same treaties existed then as now. No final
determination had been arrived at by the Convention. Who refused to licenses? The
Government
did, because directed to do so by the Secretary of
State for the Colonies. But he need not have
directed them at all, for the treaties were there to
refer to. When the Secretary said they could not
grant the licences, why did not the Government say
they intended to do so without infringing on the
fishery rights of the French? They did not do so,
and so neglected their duty. Now, when his
Excellency went home and said so, the Secretary
replied, Oh you may do that of course; it was
never intended that you should not do as you
pleased with the land; and we have the Government
gloritying themselves on the fact that they have
repaired their own blunder. It was a great privilege to be allowed to search on the
land, and be
at the same time told you must not erect buildings
on the French Shore. Where was the service doing,
or what was precisely due to the Governor? The
proposed amendment simply embodied that which
he (Mr. T.) had said. The treaties were the difficulty, and they were still in existence.
He felt
much plessure in supporting the amendament.
Mr. PROWSE.— The hon. member for St. John's
West had just given them a dissertation on the art
of Government, but had been very reticent on
the political moves of the opposition. The paragraph before the chair related to the
French Shore
question and to it the opposition proposed an amendment. Regarding the question, an
important move
had been made last session, inaugurated by the hon.
and learned leader of the opposition, who prepared a
series of resolutions, moved the House into Committee, and not only got his resolutions
passed, but had
peitions to the Queen, the Lords and the Commons
prepared, written in the very best text on the finest
of parchment. Not content with all this the hon.
and learned gentlemen personally superintended
the preparation of the tin case to carry home these
important documents. As first presented the
resolutions were such as it would not be creditable to the House to permit to be seen
outside. But all lent a hand, and they were licked
into shape, and yet all the credit og the whole
affair, tin box and all, devolved on the hon. and
learned mover. The amendment now proposed
was a natural addendum to the resolutions of
last sesstion. Other men, Governments, and
Legislatures had tried their hand at the affair,
but had not advanced it one bit; but when the
hon. and learned gentlemen took it up of
course, it was to be settled right off. Of course,
then, it was quite natural there should be a wall
of lamentation when, after all this exertion, the
result was nothing at all. It reminded him
(Mr. P.) of the question but by Mr. Jefferson
Brush to Martin Chuzzlewit, as to which of his
articles produced the greatest sensation in the
Court of St. James's. So with the hon. gentlemen opposite, they were quite surprised
that
their great resolutions produced no effect. He
(Mr. P.) wanted to know who wrote that
amendment. It could not be the hon. member
for Ferryland, for he would make it shorter
and more succinct. The British Government
not only take no notice of the tin box resolutions and petitions, but they dare to
approve of
Lord Carnarvon's policy. Why, it was a casis
bclli, and if he (Mr. P.) were in opposition; he
would be for annexation after that. It was a
pity such a grand move should turn out a fiasco.
There was another great movement yet to be
made. It had been two nights hatching, and
though they tried to shroud it in mystery, they
could not keep it quite, but let it out. He could
not then go into the question of what that movement wa to be. One thing struck him
(Mr. P.)
after listening to the long speeches of hon. members opposite. It was, what an uncommonly
good
Government we have, when gentlemen blessed
with such lungs can find nothing so say against
it. Seed potatoes had been the stock subject of
the hon. and learned member for Harbor Main,
but he had changed his tastics to suit those of the
new leader, who did not approve of the problamation. That proclamation had produced,
and
would produce, good results, and the Government intended carrying it out to its final
end. If
hon. gentlemen opposite had the good of the
country at heart, they would return to their former straightforward course respecting
the prolamation.
Mr. RENOUF.— No doubt that was a grand
display of elocution and statesman like ability to which they had just listened from
Daniel
Woodley Prowse, the wodden-headed representative of the wooden-headed constituency
of
Burego and LaPoile. Goodness help the Government when he was thier best man. It was
laughable in the extreme to hear him talk of the
hon. and learned member for Harbor Main, Mr.
Hogsett, a man who enjoyed the confidence of
the public of the country North, Southm East
and West. He (Mr. R.) regretted that, whilst
the hon. and learned member, Mr. Hogsett,
was packing up these tin cases, he did not pack
up the hon. and learned member for Burgee
and LaPoile in them. If he had been thus
packed off it would have rid the House of a
great nuisance. As for the amendment, he
(Mr. R.) held the same opinion as did his colleague, that the matter stood in the
same position as it did before the resolutions and addresses were sent home. They
had been told that
applicants for grants had recieved them, and
were prepared to go to work under the conditions contained in these grants. To his
(Mr.
R's) mind they had no security, there was nothing before them to conclude that the
matter
was so satisfactorily settled as to ally all anxiety on the part of those who had
discovered
minerals on that part of the island.—
They were told that a great deal had been
accomplished, and in the same breath that the
matter was still under discussion. The subject
was now recieveing the attention of Her Majesty's Government, and whilst the policy
of
Lord Carnarvon is to be upheld, licenses to
search are to be issued. He (Mr. R.) contended
that a grant to work mines could be of no value
without a right to the use of the strand. A few
years ago private individuals in the course of
their explorations dsicovered valuable marbles
and other things. They then went to England
to endeavor to induce capitalists in invest. The
first enquiry made was also their title, and
although they were fully satisfied of the great
value of the minerals dsicovered, yet there being
no secure title, the capitalists refused to invest.
The question in fact remained as it was two
years ago. For the sake of argument, let us
assume that a grant has been issued. He to
whome the grant was made discovered minerals,
he commences operations, develops a valuable
mine, and has a number of people employed,
he requires means of shipment, and has to bring
his minerals three or four mines to the strand,
when arrived there some Frenchmen comes and
says you are interfering with my fishery rights,
and although that may be said merely for the
sake of annoyance, he has to remove to one
side or the other; and no sooner is he
settled in the place to which he removed than another Frenchman comes and
again says that he is interfering.
Of what use, then, were these licenses, when any
single fisherman might object to any erection being
made? We are aware that we, of ourselves, can do
nothing, that the Imperial Government would
never quarrel with France for us, and that if we
were confederated the voice of four millions of
people would not effect what we cannot. Any one
who read the debates upon this question in the Imperial Parliament must be struck
with the entire
ignorance of the subject evinced by those who took
a part in that debate. We actually found a Minister
of the Crown saying that there should be mutual
concessions, that we should concede to the French
the right of fishing all along our coast. Did not
that show the Imperial authorities know nothing
at all about the matter? He considered that it
was a first subject of complaint that when we
sent petitions to the Imperial Government, we
should recieve no reply—He knew that it was
the usual course to send a reply in such cases;
and upon a matter of such vital importance be
thought it was right for us to express our views
as contained in the amendment.
The original motion was then put and carreid
on a division;
The Committee then rose and reported
progress. To sit again on Thursday.
The House adjourned till Thursday at 3 o'clocl.
This individual participated in:
