238 DEBATES AND PROCEEDINGS
[...] sented to-day. I was prepared then as now,
to defeat the Quebec scheme. Let me state to the
house that a committee was appointed in the
city to operate against the Quebec scheme; and
at the last meeting, when it was wished to adopt a
policy adverse to all union, I told them then that
I would not assist them. My opposition was entirely to the Quebec scheme. It was then
determined to send these petitions over the face of the
country. I went to Lunenburg, and assisted in
returning the gentleman who now sits here. In
respect to the petitiors, I said I would send them
into Richmond, but I would not interfere with
Mr. McDonnell's county. I was going to write '
to Mr. McDonriell, but I heard he was coming
up to Halifax. I then saw Mr. Annand, in his
own office, and he suggested the very words
that are written in the paper which he has just
read .
Mr. Miller.—It is true; it was at his own
table they were suggested, and they were printed
in his office. He presented, the other day, petitions from Dr. Cameron, which he had
sent with
his own frank.
Mr. ANNAND.—I did; at the hon. member's
instance.
Mr. MILLER.—I denied at the time having sent
these petitions, and yet he contradicted me;
now he acknowledges having franked them.
Hon. FIN. Secretary.—I must corroborate
to the fullest extent the language taken down by
the Provincial Secretary. I took the words
down at the same time. The hon. member said
—" I would have received money or office if I
had wished it."
Mr. MILLER.—The hon. member now stands
convicted before the house and country of having
uttered a " villainous falsehood."
Mr. LOCKE.—The word
money never struck
my ear. I heard preferment and place—that is
all.
C. J. CAMPBELL.—Was not the language read
here in his presence, and he never contradicted
it? Â
Mr. ANNAND.—Substantially it was the same
statement made by the hon. member for Richmond. It differs, however, in the fact that
Mr.
Brown used the word interest. What is the difference between interest and money ?
Hon. ATTY. GEN.—The hon. gentleman first
referred to Canadian gold, and then said he
himself could have had money if he had wished
it.
Hon. PROV. SECY—The present question is
one of great importance, for it involves the character of a public man. The question
came up in
reference to a paragraph which the hon. member
had put in his paper concerning some remarks on
the sale of Louisiana, by Mr. Brown. That gentleman said, even if the Union of the
Provinces
did cost Canada something for a few years it was
but a small matter in comparison with their
value. The hon. member for Halifax knew that
he was guilty when he made the charge he did
against Mr. Brown of the greatest crime of
which a public man can be guilty—that of putting a false construction on the language
of
another, for the purpose of misleading the public
mind. Mr. Brown said—suppose Canada has to
contribute a few dollars more to the intercolonial
union —what does it amount to? Look at the
sale of Louisiana to the United States. The
hon. member knows that this was a
bona fide
transaction ; there was no secret service money
connected with it. Mr. Brown is one of the most
sagacions statesmen in British North America;
but a man would be an idiot if he were to come
forward on the present occasion and say—Canada was going to use secret service money
for
the acquisition of these Provinces. The hon.
member must have known that he was putting a
false estimate on the language of Mr. Brown.
When he was met by a derisive cheer from this
side of the house, he said that he had an interview with Mr. Brown, and followed that
up with
the declaration that he could have had money if
he wished it,—that he was proffered place and
preferment in Canada. Then I felt this was a
grave charge, requiring investigation. All I Â
can say is, if any one had attempted to bribe me,
I would have felt that it would never do for me
months afterwards to come forward and mention
it. I knew enough of Mr Brown to be aware
that wherever he was known the charge would
be scouted as too absurd I read the words at
the table. and stated my intention to telegraph
them to Mr. Brown He would not repeat the
words. but said the official reporter had taken
them down I did all I could to enable him to
correct me if I was wrong. He did nothing of
the kind and therefore I telegraphed to Mr
Brown, whose answer is now before you. The
country will now understand the value of char
ges of corruption coming from such a quarter.
Now he comes forward and denies his own language, and gives the same version of the
conversation with Mr. Brown that was given by Mr.
Miller, and which he contradicted at the time.
Mr. ANNAND —I will merely say to the Provincial Secretary that I have not backed down.
What Mr Brown stated to me made the impression upon my mind-that it was for my interest
that I should join him and his friends in
carryig Confederation.
Hon. PRO. SEC —The hon member only endorsed the statement made on Friday by the
hon member for Richmond. Under the cir
cumstances not the slightest imputation can rest
upon Mr Brown's character. All that he said
was, that a man of Mr Annand's position ought
to be able to make himself some standing in
the Confederation. He would have as good a
chance as any one else. Perhaps if Mr Brown
understood the talents or the position of the
hon member he would not have said so much.
What would he thought of a hon. member who
was going about day by day. and button-holing
gentlemen. and telling them that the best way
to get to Ottawa is by opposing the scheme of
Confederation. Is that corruption ? I do not
think the non. gentleman would like to say so?
OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY 239
Mr MILLER —The hon. member has brought
two charges against my veracity First, with
regard to the conversation with Mr. Brown
which he now admits to he substantially true.
Secondly, with regard to the petitions which he
presented here on the day I explained my position on the question He accused me of
having
sent these particular petitions to lnverness, and
I denied it on the instant I never denied that
I was a party to sending petitions through the
country He now admits that he sent and franked these petitions himself Where, then,
is his
charge of want of veracity on either side?
Mr ANNAND —The hon member was one of
an organization in the city who unfortunatelv
had too much confidence in him ; for it now appears he was only there as a spy. On
one occasion in the presence of some of the most influential merchants ot the city,
so inflated was
he that he offered to take charge of the whole
lsland of Cape Breton, and send petitions to it
The hon. gentlemen told you that I with my
own stamp, sent these petitions to Dr. Cameron,
but I did so at his request . because he said he
did not wish to come into conflict with Mr Mc
Donnell The hon member thought so much
of his own shillings and pence that he would not
take his own stamps The hon gentlemen said
that I dictated the paper in question; but can
you believe that a gentleman of his importance,
who offered to take charge of the whole island
of Cape Breton. would allow any one to dictate
to him ? All l can say is, the hon. member
wrote it with his own hands
Mr. TOBIN—I think we have had about
enough of these contradictions and I do trust
that a question of such importance as the present will be deliberately and calmly
discussed
Mr. MILLER — It was the hon member for
East Halifax who brought the matter here, and
he also is blameable for the discussion that has
ensued I thought, when the hon gentleman
got up, he was going to expose me but now i find
that all he has done is to bring a charge ot vanity against me.
Hon ATTY GEN—I recollect distinctly yes.
terday when the hon member for Richmond
gave the version of the conversation with Mr.
Brown, the. hon member for East Halifax
got up and contradicted it: now he says it is
substantially the same version. But we all
know the hon gentleman's speech was not intended tor this house. The object was to
irritate
the public mind of this country.
A good deal of further desultory conversation ensued, which it is impossible to give
in
extenso.
Mr BLACKWOOD thought every gentleman
should be only held responsible for the opinons
he held and expressed himself
Mr LOCKE said that the country had not petitioned very tar ely during the present
session,
in as much as the impression prevailedd that the
question of Union would not come up
Hon PROV SEC said that he was prepared
by the most conclusive evidence to prove that
the whole effect of the policy of the Anti-
Union party was to annex us to the American
States He then went on to say that they dared not send petitions to the country against
all
Union, for they knew that the Union sentiment
among the intelligent masses was very strong.
All that they could do was to get signatures to
petitions taking objections to certain features of
the Quebec scheme. Yet despite the efforts
made by the wealthy and powerful Anti-Union
organization in this city, only about 15000
names of men, women and children, could be
got last year in the whole province. He had
himself in a few weeks, some years ago, got
25000 persons to petition for a matter of comparatively small importance, namely a
dissolution of the Assembly. Now another year had
passed, and despite all the agitation in the press
and otherwise, only four or five thousand petitioners appeared in opposition—not to
Union,
but to some details of the Quebec scheme.
Now when the opponents of that scheme came
forward an I offered to meet the friends of Union
half way, it was the duty of the latter to consent, in view of the prevalent sentiment
of the
country. He had heard from Annapolis and
the Western counties and was proud to be. able
to say that the course the government wished
to pursue in respect to Union met with the enthusiastîc approval of the people
Mr LOCKE said that the government had appealed to three constituencies since the question
of Confederation came up, and had lost them.
If the hon Provincial Secretary was convinced
that the people were not opposed to Union why
did not he dissolve and appeal to them.
Mr BLANCHARD said that the house had heard
the way the petitions against Confederation got
into the country, and yet despite all the efforts
that had b: been made, only a few hundred names
had been received from lnverness with a population ot 20 000 people.
Mr KILLAM said that the people of Yarmouth
were against confederation. He knew that the
people of Digby were also opposed to Union.
He presumed when the vote was taken, the
members of that county would act in accordance
with the sentiments of their constituents
Hon. ATTY GEN. said that no gentleman in
favour ot Annexation would be expected to
favour Confederation
Mr Ross saint that it had been understood in
Victoria that the question of Confederation would
not come up this session, amt therefore it was
not thought necessary to get up pettions. The
best way to test the feeling of the people would
be to appeal to them
Hon. PROV. SEC said that the election in
Annapolis was not decided on the Confederation
scheme. The Dalhousie College question, the
Pictou Railway and the School B
[?] were the
questions that influenced the election The
Quebec scheme had only just been propounded
when the election was over, and was not one of
the issues Not one word was said about it on
the hustings. At a public meeting subsequently
held in it that county where he had been present,
the Anti Unionists could not pass a resolution
against Union Again in the shiretown the only
resolution passed was one of thanks to himself
240
DEBATES AND PROCEEDINGS
for being present and giving so much information on the subject As respects Lunenburg
he
believed if it were not for the Education Measure he could have brought in a government
candidate pledged to support a Union of the Colonies As respects the other county
mentioned
the hon. member for Yarmouth (Mr Killam)
could not get his own candidate in, and Mr.
Townsend had been returned. He (Dr T )
believed that Yarmouth might be considered
opposed to Union, but every one knew what
was the ruling sentiment in that county At a
meeting held in that county for the purpose of
sending delegates to the Detroit Convention.
leading men came forward with the hon. gentleman for Yarmouth and declared that if
the
treaty were abrogated the sooner Nova Scotia
was annexed to the United States the better
He was informed that the other hon. member
(Mr. Townsend) stood up manfully. and said
they ought to be ashamed. Under such circum
stances it was not strange that a portion of the
county of Yarmouth opposed the Union of the
Colonies
Mr. Colin Campbell said that the hon. member for Yatmouth would know the sentiments of
the representatives of the county of Digby at
the proper time They were prepared to assume themselves the responsibility of dealing
with the question in that spirit and manner that
would best advance the interests of the country.
Mr. Killam said that he would deal with
the question ot Confederation at the proper
time He had not attempted to influence the
constituency against Mr Townsend He was
not aware that any opinions in respect to annexation had been m oted in the meeting
referred to.
Mr HATFIELD regretted that so much time
had been wasted that might be more profitably
employed.
Mr. MCLELAN said that he believed the ef
fect of Confederation would be to annex the
Provinces to the United States
Mr C J. CAMPBELL presented a petition from
H. Cameron and others against Confederation.
The subject then dropped
Mr. WHITMAN introduced a bill to legalize as
sessment rolls of the county of Annapolis.
The house then adjourned.
This individual participated in:
