LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.
THURSDAY, February 9,
1865.
The order of the day for resuming the adjourned debate on the proposed
Address to Her Majesty, on the subject of the Confederation
of the British North American Provinces having been called ;
The Honorable
MR. McGEE said—Mr.
SPEAKER, I rise to endeavor to fulfil the promise made in my name last
evening by the Lower Canadian leader of this House. After the four
speeches that have already been delivered from this quarter of the
House, it may very well be supposed that little of essential importance
remains to be said. On Monday the Attorney General West, in exposing
the case for the Government, in moving this Address to Her
Majesty, went very fully through all the items of the resolutions agreed
upon at the Quebec Conference, and gave us a full analysis of the
whole project with his own constitutional commentaries upon the proceedings of that
body. On the next evening, the Attorney
General East gave us his views also, treating chiefly of the difficulties in
Lower Canada. The same night, my hon. friend, the Minister of Finance,
gave us a financial view of the whole subject ; and last evening the
Hon. President of the Council gave us another extended financial and
political address, with some arguments from " the Upper Canadian point of
view," as the phrase is. It may well therefore seem that
after these speeches little of essential importance remains
to be stated. Still this subject is so vast, the project before the House is
so vast, and comprehends within it so many objects of interest, the
atmosphere that surrounds a subject of this importance is so
subtle and fluctuating, that there may be, I am feign to believe, a little
joiner-work still left to do—there may be a
hiatus here and there to fill up ; and although, as far as what
is called " the preliminary case" is concerned, the question might
perhaps very well have rested with the four speeches already
delivered—there may be some slight additional contribution made,
and, such as it is, in my own humble way, I propose to make it to-night.
(Hear, hear.) We all remember that in the nursery legend of the Three Kings
of Cologne, CASPAR brought myrrh, and MELOCHIOR incense, and BALTASSAR
gold, but I am afraid my contribution will be less valuable than any of
these, yet such as it is I cheerfully bring it, particularly when there
are so many in this and the other provinces who would like to know what
my own views are in relation to the present crisis. (Hear-) With your
approbation, sir, and the forbearance of the House, I will
endeavour to treat this subject in this way :—First, to give some slight
sketch of the history of the question ; then to examine the existing motives
which ought to prompt us to secure a speedy union of these provinces ;
then to speak of the difficulties which this question has encountered before reaching
its present fortunate stage ; then to
say something of the mutual advantages, in a social rather than political
point of view, which these provinces will have in their union, and
lastly to add a few words on the Federal principle in general, when I
shall have done. In other words, I propose to consider the question of union
mainly from within, and as far as possible to avoid going over the
ground already so fully and so much better occupied by hon. friends who
have already spoken upon the subject. My hon. friend, the member for Hochelaga, thought
he did a very clever thing the other evening
when he disentombed an old newspaper article of mine, entitled " A New
Nationality," and endeavored to fix on me the paternity of the
phrase—destined to become prophetic—which was employed by a very
distinguished personage in the Speeh from the Throne at the opening of the
session. I do happen to remember the article alluded to as one of my
first essays in political writing in Canada ; but
126 I am quite sure that the almost forgotten
publication in which it appeared was never known, even by name, to
the illustrious person who delivered the speech on that occasion. But
I will own when I saw my bantling held up to the admiration of the
House in the delicate and fostering hands of the hon. member for Hochelaga,
I was not ashamed of it ; on the contrary, perhaps there was some
tingling of parental pride when I saw what ten years ago I pointed out
as the true position for these colonies to take, about to be adopted by all
the colonies under such favorable circumstances. I do not
think it ought to be made a matter of re- proach to me, or a
cause for belittling the importance of the subject, that ten years ago
I used the identical phrase employed in the Speech from the Throne. The idea
itself is a good one, and it may have floated through the minds of
many men and received intellectual hospitality even from the
honorable member for Hochelaga himself. One is reminded by
this sort of thing, of Puff in the
Critic. "Two people" happened "to hit
upon the same thought, and SHAKSPERE made use of it first—that's all."
(Laughter.) My honorable friend is in this respect, no doubt, the
SHAKSPERE of the new nationality. (Renewed laughter.) If there is
anything in the article he has read to the House which is
deserving of disapprobation, he is
particeps criminis, and equally blameable if
not more blameable than myself. He is indeed the older
sinner, and I bow to him in that character with all proper humility.
(Renewed laughter.) Really, Mr. SPEAKER, the attempt to fix the parentage of
this child of many fathers is altogether absurd and futile. It is
almost as ridiculous as the attempt to fix the name of this new
Confederation, in advance of the decision of the Gracious
Lady to whom the matter is to be referred. I have read in one newspaper
published in a western city not less than a dozen attempts of this
nature. One individual chooses Tuponia and another Hochelaga, as a suitable name for
the new nationality.
Now I would ask any hon. member of this House how he would feel if he woke
up some fine morning and found himself, instead of a Canadian, a
Tuponian or Hochelagander. (Laughter.) I think, sir, we may
safely leave for the present the discussion of the name as well as the
origin of the new system proposed ; when the Confederation has a place
among the nations of the world, and opens a new page in history, it will be
time enough to look into its antecedents, and when it has reached this
stage there are a few men who, having struggled for it in its earlier
difficulties, will then deserve to be honorably mentioned. I shall not be
guilty of the bad taste of complimenting those with whom I have the
honor to be associated ; but when we reach the stage of research,
which lies far beyond the stage of deliberation in these affairs,
there are some names that ought not to be forgotten. (Hear, hear.) So
far back as the year 1800, the Honorable Mr. UNIACKE, a leading politician in Nova
Scotia at that date, submitted a scheme of
Colonial Union to the Imperial authorities. In 1815, Chief Justice SEWELL,
whose name will be well remembered as a leading lawyer of this city
and farsighted politician, submitted a scheme. In 1822, Sir
JOHN BEVERLEY ROBINSON, at the request of the Colonial Office,
submitted a project of the same kind; and I need not refer to the
report of Lord DURHAM on Colonial Union in 1839. These are all
memorable, and some of them are great names. If we have dreamed a dream
of union (as some hon. gentlemen say), it is at least worth while
remarking that a dream which has been dreamed by such wise and good
men, may, for aught we know or you know, have been a sort of vision—a vision
foreshadowing forthcoming natural events in a clear intelligence. A
vision (I say it without irreverence, for the event concerns the
lives of millions living, and yet to come) resembling those
seen by the DANIELS and JOSEPHS of old, foreshadowing the trials of
the future ; the fate of tribes and peoples ; the rise and fall of
dynasties. But the immediate history of the measure is
sufficiently wonderful without dwelling on the remoter predictions of
so many wise men. Whoever, in 1862, or even in 1863, would have
told us that we should see, even what we see in these seats by which I
stand—such a representation of interests acting together,
would be accounted, as our Scotch friends say, " half-daft ;"—and whoever,
in the Lower Provinces about the same time, would have ventured to
foretell the composition of their delegations, which sat with us under
this roof last October, would probably have been considered equally
demented. (Laughter.) But the thing came about, and if those
gentlemen, who have had no immediate hand in bringing it about,
and therefore naturally felt less interest in the project than we who did, will only
give us the
127 benefit of the doubt, will only assume that we are
not all altogether wrong-headed, we hope to show them still farther, as we
think we have already shown them, that we are by no means without
reason in entering on this enterprise. I submit, however, we may very
well dismiss the antecedent history of the question for the present : it
grew from an unnoticed feeble plant, to be a stately and flourishing
tree, and for my part any one that pleases may say he made the tree grow,
if I can only have hereafter my fair share of the shelter and the
shade. (Cheers) But in the present stage of the question, the first
real stage of its success—the thing that gave importance to theory in men's
minds—was the now celebrated despatch, signed by two members of this
Government and an hon. gentleman formerly their colleague, a member of the other
House ; I refer to the despatch of
1858. The recommendations in that despatch lay dormant until revived by
the Constitutional Committee of last Session, which led to the
Coalition, which led to the Quebec Conference, which led to the draft
of the Constitution now on our table, which will lead, I am fain to believe,
to the union of all these provinces. (Hear, hear.) At the same time
that we mention the distinguished politicians, I think we ought
not to forget those zealous and laborious contributors to
the public press, who, although not associated with governments, and not
themselves at the time in politics, addressed the public
mind, and greatly contributed to give life and interest to this question,
and indirectly to bring it to the happy position in which it
now stands. Of those gentlemen I will mention two. I do not know whether
hon. gentlemen of this House have seen some letters on colonial union,
written in 1855, the last addressed to the late Duke of NEWCASTLE, by Mr. P. S.
HAMILTON, an able public writer of Nova Scotia, and
the present Gold Commissioner of that province ; but I take
this opportunity of bearing my testimony to his well-balanced judgment,
political sagacity and the skilful handling the subject received from
him at a very early period. (Hear, hear. There is another little book
written in English, six or seven years ago, to which I must refer. It is a
pamphlet, which met with an extraordinary degree of success, entitled
Nova Britannia,
by my hon. friend the member for South Lanark (Mr. MORRIS) ; and as he
has been one of the principal agents in bringing into existence the
present Government,
which is now carrying out the idea embodied in his book, I trust he
will forgive me if I take the opportunity, although he is present, of
reading a single sentence to show how far he was in advance and how true he
was to the coming event, which we are now considering. At
page 57 of his pamphlet—which I hope will be reprinted among the political
miscellanies of the provinces when we are one country and one people—I
find this paragraph :-
The dealing with the destinies of a future
Britannic empire, the shaping its course, the laying its
foundations broad and deep, and the erecting thereon a noble and
enduring superstructure, are indeed duties that may well evoke the energies of our
people, and nerve the arms and give power and
enthusiasm to the aspirations of all true patriots. The very magnitude of
the interests involved, will, I doubt not, elevate many
amongst us above the demands of mere sectionalism, and enable them
to evince sufficient comprehensiveness of mind to deal in the
spirit of real statesmen with issues so momentous, and to originate and develope
a national line of commercial and general
policy, such as will prove adapted to the wants an exigencies of our
position.
There are many other excellent passages in the work, but I will not detain
the House with many quotations. The spirit that animates the whole
will be seen from the extract I have read. But whatever the private
writer in his closet may have conceived, whatever even the
individual statesman may have designed, so long as the
public mind was uninterested in the adoption, even in the
discussion of a change in our position so momentous as this, the union
of these separate provinces, the individual laboured in vain—perhaps sir,
not wholly in vain, for although his work may not have borne fruit
then, it was kindling a fire that would ultimately light up the whole
political horizon, and herald the dawn of a better day for our country
and our people. Events stronger than advocacy, events stronger than
men, have come in at last like the fire behind the invisible writing to
bring out the truth of these writings and to impress them upon the
mind of every thoughtful man who has considered the position and probable
future of these scattered provinces. (Cheers.) Before I go further
into the details of my subject, I will take this opportunity of congratulating this
House and the public of all the provinces
upon the extraordinary activity which has been given to this subject since
it has become a leading topic of public discussion in the maritime,
and what I may
128 call relatively to them, the inland provinces. It is
astonishing how active has been the public mind in all those communities
since the subject has been fairly launched. I have watched with great
attention the expression of public opinion in the Lower Provinces as
well as in our own, and I am rejoiced to find that even in the smallest of
the provinces I have been able to read writings and speeches
which would do no discredit to older and more cultivated communitiesarticles and
speeches worthy of any press and of any
audience. The provincial mind, it would seem, under the inspiration of a
great question, leaped at a single bound out of the slough of mere
mercenary struggles for office, and took post on the high and honorable
ground from which alone this great subject can be taken in in all its
dimensions,—had risen at once to the true dignity of this discussion
with an elasticity that does honor to the communities that have exhibited it,
and gives assurance that we have the metal, the material, out of which
to construct a new and vigorous nationality. (Cheers.) We find in the
journals and in the speeches of public men in the Lower Provinces a discussion of
the first principles of government, a discussion of
the principles of constitutional law, and an intimate knowledge and close
application of the leading facts in constitutional history,
which gives to me at least the satisfaction and assurance that, if we never
went farther in this matter, we have put an end for the present, and I
hope for long, to bitterer and smaller controversies. We have given the
people some sound mental food, and to every man who has a capacity for
discussion we have given a topic upon which he can fitly exercise his
powers, no longer gnawing at a file and wasting his abilities in the
poor effort of advancing the ends of some paltry faction or party. I can
congratulate this House and province and the provinces below, that such
is the case, and I may observe, with some satisfaction, that the various authors
and writers seem to be speaking or
writing as if in the visible presence of all the colonies. (Hear, hear.) They
are no longer hole-and-corner celebrities : they seem to think that
their words will be scanned and weighed afar off as well as at home. We
have, I believe, several hundred celebrities in Canada — my friend Mr.
MORGAN, I believe, has made out a list of them—(laughter) —but they are
no longer now local celebrities ; if celebrities at all
they must be celebrities for British North America ; for every one of
the speeches made by them on this subject is watched in all the
provinces, and in point of fact by the mere appearance of political union,
we have made a mental union among the people of all these provinces ;
and many men now speak with a dignity and carefulness which formerly
did not characterise them, when they were watched only by their own narrow
and struggling section, and weighed only according to a stunted local
standard. (Hear, hear.) Federation, I hope, may supply to all our
public men just ground for uniting in nobler and more profitable contests
than those which have signalized the past. (Hear, hear.) We on this
side, Mr. SPEAKER, propose for that better future our plan of union ;
and, if you will allow me, I shall go over what appear to me the principal
motives which exist at present for that union. My hon. friend the
Finance Minister mentioned the other evening several strong motives
for union—free access to the sea, an extended market, breaking down of
hostile tariffs, a more diversified field for labor and capital, our
enhanced credit with England, and our greater effectiveness when united
for assistance in time of danger. (Cheers) The Hon. President of the
Council also enumerated several motives for union in relation to the
commercial advantages which will flow from it, and other powerful reasons
which may be advanced in favor of it. But the motives to such a
comprehensive change as we propose, must be mixed motives—partly
commercial, partly military, and partly political ; and I shall go
over a few—not strained or simulated—motives which are entertained by
many people of all these provinces, and are rather of a social, or, strictly
speaking, political, than of a financial kind. In the first place, I
echo what was stated in the speech last night of my honorable friend, the
President of the Council—that we cannot stand still ; we cannot stave
off some great change ; we cannot stand alone, province apart from
province, if we would ; and that we are in a state of political transition.
All, even honorable gentlemen who are opposed to this union, admit
that we must do something, and that that something must not be
a mere temporary expedient. We are compelled, by warning
voices from within and without, to make a change, and a great change.
We all, with one voice, who are unionists, declare our conviction that we
can129not go on as we have gone ; but you, who are all
anti-unionists, say—" Oh! that is begging the question ; you have not yet
proved that." Well, Mr. SPEAKER, what proofs do the gentlemen want ? I
presume there are three influences which determine any great change in
the course of any individual or state. First—his patron, owner,
employer, protector, ally, or friend ; or, in politics, "Imperial
connection." Secondlyhis partner, comrade, or fellow-laborer, or
near neighbor. And, thirdly,—the man himself, or the state itself.
Now, in our case, all three causes have concurred to warn and force us
into a new course of conduct. What are these warnings ? We have had at
least three. The first is from England, and is a friendly warning. England
warned us by several matters of fact, according to her custom, rather
than verbiage, that the colonies had entered upon a new era of
existence, a new phase in their career. She has given us this warning
in several different shapeswhen she gave us " Responsible
Government"—when she adopted Free Trade—when she repealed
the Navigation laws—and when, three or four years ago, she commenced that
series of official despatches in relation to militia and defence which
she has ever since poured in on us, in a steady stream, always bearing
the same solemn burthen—"prepare ! prepare ! prepare !" These warnings gave
us notice that the old order of things between the colonies and the
Mother Country had ceased, and that a new order must take its place.
(Hear, hear.) About four years ago, the first despatches began to be
addressed to this country, from the Colonial Office, upon
the subject. From that day to this there has been a steady stream of
despatches in this direction, either upon particular or general points
connected with our defence ; and I venture to say, that if bound up together, the
despatches of the lamented Duke of NEWCASTLE
alone would make a respectable volume—all notifying this
Government, by the advices they conveyed, that the relations—the
military apart from the political and commercial relations of this
province to the Mother Country had changed ; and we were told in the most
explicit language that could be employed, that we were no longer to
consider ourselves, in relation to defence, in the same position we
formerly occupied towards the Mother Country. Well, these warnings have been
friendly warnings ; and if we have failed to do our part in regard to
them, we must, at
all events, say this, that they were addressed to our Government so
continuously and so strenuously that they freed the Imperial power of
the responsibility for whatever might follow, because they showed to the
colonies clearly what, in the event of certain contingencies arising,
they had to expect. We may grumble or not at the necessity of
preparation England imposes upon us, but, whether we like it or not, we
have, at all events, been told that we have entered upon a new era in
our military relations to the rest of the Empire. (Hear, hear.) Then,
sir, in the second place, there came what I may call the other warning from
withoutthe American warning. (Hear, hear.) Republican America gave us her notices
in times past, through her press, and
her demagogues and her statesmen,—but of late days she has given us
much more intelligible noticessuch as the notice to abrogate the
Reciprocity Treaty, and to arm the lakes, contrary to the
provisions of the addenda to the treaty of 1818. She has given us another
notice in imposing a vexatious passport system ; another in her avowed
purpose to construct a ship canal round the Falls of Niagara, so as "
to pass war vessels from Lake Ontario to Lake Erie ;" and yet another, the
most striking one of all, has been given to us, if we will only
understand it, by the enormous expansion of the American army and
navy. I will take leave to read to the House a few figures which show
the amazing, the unprecedented growth, which has not, perhaps, a
parallel in the annals of the past, of the military power of our neighbors
within the past three or four years. I have the details
here by me, but shall only read the results, to show the House the emphatic
meaning of this most serious warning. In January, 1861, the regular
army of the United States, including of course the whole of the
States, did not exceed 15,000 men. This number was reduced, from desertion
and other causes, by 5,000 men, leaving 10,000 men as the army of the
States. In December, 1862—that is, from January, 1861, to January,
1863, this army of 10,000 was increased to 800,000 soldiers actually in
the field. (Hear, hear.) No doubt there are exaggerations in some of
these figuresthe rosters were, doubtless, in some cases
filled with fictitious names, in order to procure the bounties that were
offered ; but if we allow two-thirds as correct, we find that a people
who had an army of 10,000 men in 1861, had in two years increased it to an
130 army of 600,000 men. As to their ammunition and stock of war material at the opening
of the war—that is to say,
at the date of the attack upon Fort Sumpter—we find that they had of
siege and heavy guns 1,952 ; of field artillery, 231 ; of infantry
firearms, 473,000 ; of cavalry firearms, 31,000 ; and of ball and shell,
363,000. At the end of 1863—the latest period to which I have
statistics upon the subject—the 1,052 heavy guns had become 2,116 ; the
231 field pieces had become 2,965 ; the 473 ,000 infantry arms had
become 2,423,000 ; the 31,000 cavalry arms had become 369,000 , and the 363,000
ball and shell had become 2,925,000. Now, as to the
navy of the United States, I wish to show that this wonderful
development of war power in the United States is the second warning we have
had, that we cannot go on as we have gone. (Hear, hear.) In January,
1861, the ships of war belonging to the United States were 83 ; in
December, 1864, they numbered 671, of which 54 were monitors and ironclads, carrying
4,610 guns, with a tonnage of 510,000 tons,
and manned by a force of 51,000 men. These are frightful figures for
the capacity of destruction they represent, for the heaps of carnage that
they represent, for the quantity of human blood spilt that they
represent, for the lust of conquest that they represent, for the evil
passions that they represent, and for the arrest of the onward
progress of civilization that they represent. But it is not the figures
which give the worst view of the fact—for England still carries more
guns afloat even than our war-making neighbors. (Cheers) It is the
change which has taken place in the spirit of the people of the Northern
States themselves which is the worst view of the fact. How
far have they travelled since the humane CHANNING preached the unlawfulness
of war —since the living SUMNER delivered his addresses to
the Peace Society on the same theme! I remember an accomplished poet,
one of the most accomplished the New England States have ever
produced, took very strong grounds against the prosecution of the
Mexican war, and published the Bigelow Papers, so well known in American
literature, to show the ferocity and criminality of war.
He thus made Mr. BIRD-OF-FREEDOM SAWIN sing :—
Ef you take a soaord an' draor it, An go
stick a feller thru, Guv'ment won't answer for it, God'll send the bill
to you!
(Laughter.) This was slightly audacious and irreverent in expression, but
it was remarkably popular in New England at that time. The writer is
now one of the editors of a popular Boston periodical, and would be
one of the last, I have no doubt, to induce a Northern soldier to
withdraw his sword from the body of any unhappy Southerner whom he had,
contrary to the poet's former political ethics, "stuck thru."
(Laughter.) But it is not the revolution wrought in the minds of
men of great intelligence that is most to be deplored—for the powerful
will of such men may compel their thoughts back again to a philosophy of
peace ; no, it is the mercenary and military interests created under
Mr. LINCOLN—which are represented, the former by an estimated
governmental outlay of above $100,000,000 this year, and the other by the
800,000 men whose blood is thus to be bought and paid for ; by the
armies out of uniform who prey upon the army ; by the army of contractors
who are to feed and clothe and arm the million ; by that other army,
the army of tax-collectors, who cover the land, seeing that no
industry escapes unburthened, no possession unentered, no affection even,
untaxed. Tax ! tax ! tax ! is the cry from the rear !
Blood ! blood ! blood ! is the cry from the front ! Gold ! gold ! gold ! is
the chuckling undertone which comes up from the mushroom millionaires, well named a shoddy
aristocracy. Nor do I think the army interest, the contracting interest, and
the tax- gathering interest, the worst results that have
grown out of this war. There is another and equally serious interest—the
change that has come over the spirit, mind and principles of the
people, that terrible change which has made war familiar and even
attractive to them. When the first battle was fought—when, in the language
of the Duke of WELLINGTON, the first "butcher's bill was
sent in"—a shudder of horror ran through the length and breadth of the
country ; but by and by as the carnage increased, no newspaper was
considered worth laying on the breakfast table unless it contained the story of
the butchery of thousands of men. " Only a couple of
thousand killed ! Pooh, pooh, that's nothing !" exclaimed Mr. SHODDY
as he sipped his coffee in his luxurious apartment ; and nothing
short of the news of ten, fifteen, twenty thousand human beings struck
dead in one day would satisfy the jaded palate of men craving for excitement, and
such horrible excitement as attend131ed the wholesale murder of their fellow creatures. Have these
sights and sounds no warning addressed to us ? Are we as those who
have eyes and see not ; ears and hear not ; reason, neither do they
understand ? If we are true to Canada—if we do not desire to become
part and parcel of this peoplewe cannot overlook this the greatest
revolution of our own times. Let us remember this, that
when the three cries among our next neighbors are money, taxation, blood,
it is time for us to provide for our own security. I said in
this House, during the session of the year 1861, that the first
gun fired at Fort Sumpter had "a message for us ;" I was unheeded then
; I repeat now that every one of the 2,700 great guns in the field,
and every one of the 4,600 guns afloat, whenever it opens its month, repeats
the solemn warning of England—prepare—prepare—prepare !
(Cheers.) But I may be told by some moralizing friend, Oh ! but when
they get out of this, they will have had enough of it, and they will be very
glad to rest on their Iaurels. They ! Who ? The shoddy aristocracy
have enough of it ? The disbanded army of tax-gathers have enough it ?
The manufacturers of false intelligence have enough of it ? Who is it
possible will have had enough of it ? The fighting men themselves ? I
dare say they would all like to have a furlough, but all experiences
teach us, it is not of war soldiers tire but of peace ; it is not of the sea
sailors tire, but of the land. Jack likes to land, and have a frolic
and spend his money, so does Jack's brother the fighting landsman—but the
one is soon as much out of his element as the other, when parted from
his comrades ; when denied the gypsy joys of the camp, when he no
longer feels his sword, he looks up to it where it hangs, and sighs to take
it down and be " at work" again. He will even quit his native country,
if she continues perversely peaceful, and go into foreign service,
rather than remain what he calls " idle." (Hear.) This is experience,
which I beg respectfully to cite in opposition to the seductive, disarming fallacy
of my moralizing friend. (Hear, hear.) The
Attorney General East told us in his speech the other night,
that one of the features of the original programme of the American
Revolutionists was the acquisition of Canada to the United States.
They pretend to underrate the importance of this country, now that
they are fully occupied elsewhere ; but I remember that the late Mr.
WEBSTER—who was
not a demagogue—at the opening of the Worcester and Albany Railway,
some years since, expressed the hope that the railways of the New
England States would all point towards Canada, because their influence and
the demands of commerce would in time bring Canada into the union and
increase the New England element in that union. (Hear, hear.) I think,
sir, I am justified in regarding the American conflict as one of the
warnings we have received ; and the third warning, that things cannot go on
in this country as they are, is a warning voice from within—a warning
voice from our own experience in the government of these provinces. (Hear, hear.)
On these internal constitutional difficulties
existing among ourselves, which were so fully exposed last evening by my hon. friend
the President of the Council, I need
say little ; they are admitted to have been real, not imaginary, on all
hands. An illustration was used in another place in explaining this
part of the subject by the venerable and gallant knight, our Premier,
than which nothing could be more clear. He observed that when we had had
five administrations within two years, it was full time to look out
for some permanent remedy for such a state of things. Truemost true —Constitutional
Government among us had touched its
lowest point when it existed only by the successful search of a
messenger or a page, after a member, willingly or
unwillingy absent from his seat. Any one might in those days have been the
saviour of his country. (Laughter) All he had to do was,
when one of the five successive governments which arose in two
years, was in danger, to rise in his place, say "yea !" and presto the country was saved. (Laughter)
This House was fast losing, under such a state of things its hold on the
country ; the administrative departments were becoming disorganized
under such frequent changes of chiefs and policies ; we were
nearly as bad as the army of the Potomac, before its " permanent remedy" was
found in General GRANT. Well ! we have had our three warnings. One
warning from within and two from without. I dare say, sir, we all
remember the old class-book story of Mrs. THRALE'S "Three Warnings ;" how
Death promised not to come after a certain individual he had
unintentionally intruded on, on his wedding day. I say,
unintentionally- for Death is a gentleman, and seldom walks in,
unannounced—(laughter)—but he promised not to call upon this
particular per132son, without giving him three distinct warnings. Well, the
honorable gentleman in question—I dare say he was honorable, and a
member of some House,—he, like all the rest of us expected to outlive
everybody. But in process of years he fell lame, then afterwards, he
became deaf, and at last he grew blind: then Death's hour had come and
in site of some admirable pleading on behalf of the defendant in the case, he
had his " three warnings" like a Parisian editor, his case was closed,
his form was locked up, and his impression was struck of the face of the
earth, and Death claimed and had his own. (Laughter.) Now, sir, we have
had three warnings, and if we do not take heed of them and prepare for
the possible future condition into which we may be plunged, woe to us if
we are found unprepared when the hour of destiny strikes! (Cheers.) We
have submitted a plan preparing us for such a contingency, and the
Attorneys General East and West have analysed its constitutional
character, while the Minister of Finance and the President of the
Council have treated it in its financial aspects. There are some
objections taken to the plan, I understand, but I do not believe that
any member will get up in this House, and declare that he is
an anti-unionist, that he is opposed to all union, and that he considers
union unnecessary and inexpedient. (Hear, hear.) I do not know that there is
one man out of the one hundred and thirty who compose this
House, in view of the circumstances in which we are placed, who will
declare that he is opposed to any sort of union with the Lower
Provinces. One may say that he does not like this or the other
clause—that he does not like this or that feature of the proposed
scheme; but still all admit that union of some kind would increase our protection
and be a source of strength. Some honorable gentlemen,
while admitting that we have entered, within the present decade, on a
period of political transition, have contended that we might have
bridged the abyss with that Prussian pontoon, called a Zollverein. But if any one
for a moment will remember that the trade of the
whole front of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia gravitates at
present along-shore to Portland and Boston, while the trade of Upper
Canada, west of Kingston, has long gravitated across the lakes to New
York, he will see, I think, that a mere Zollverein treaty without a
strong political end to serve, and some political power at its
back, would be, in our new
circumstances, merely waste per. (Hear, hear.) The charge that we have
not gone far enough—that we have not struck out boldly for a
consolidated union, instead of a union with reserved local jurisdictions, is
another charge which deserves some notice. To this I answer that, if
we had had, as was proposed, an Intercolonial Railway twenty years
ago, we might by this time have been, perhaps, and only perhaps, in a
condition to unite into one consolidated Government; but certain
politicians and capitalists having defeated that project twenty years ago,
special interests took the place great general interests might by this
time have occupied ; vested rights and local ambitions arose and were
recognized; and all these had to be admitted as existing in a pretty
advanced stage of development, when our Conferences were called
together. (Hear, hear.) The lesson to be learned from this squandering
of quarter centuries by British Americans is this, that if we lose the
present propitious opportunity, we may find it as hard a few years
hence to get an audience, even for any kind of union (except American union)
as we should have found it to get a hearing last year for a
Legislative union, from the long period of estrangement and non-intercourse which
had existed between these provinces, and the
special interests which had grown up in the meantime in each of them.
(Cheers.) Another motive to union, or rather a phase of the last motive
spoken of, is this, that the policy of our neighbors to the south of
us has always been aggressive. There has always been a desire amongst
them for the acquisition of new territory, and the inexorable law of
democratic existence seems to be its absorption. They
coveted Florida, and seized it; they coveted Louisiana, and purchased it;
they coveted Texas, and stole it; and then they picked a quarrel with
Mexico, which ended by their getting California. (Hear, hear.) They
sometimes pretend to despise these colonies as prizes beneath their
ambition; but had we not had the strong arm of England over us, we
should not now have had a separate existence. (Cheers) The acquisition of
Canada was the first ambition of the American Confederacy,
and never ceased to be so, when her troops were a handful and her navy
scarce a squadron. Is it likely to be stopped now, when she counts her guns
afloat by thousands and her troops by hundreds of thousands?
On this motive, a very powerful expression of opinion has
133 lately appeared in a published letter of the
Archbishop of Halifax, Dr. CONNOLLY. Who is the Archbishop of Halifax ? In
either of the coast colonies, where he has labored in his high
vocation for nearly a third of a century, it would be absurd to ask the
question ; but in Canada he may not be equally well
known. Some of my honorable friends in this and the other House, who were
his guests last year, must have felt the impress of his character as
well as the warmth of his hospitality. (Hear, hear.) Well, he is known
as one of the first men in sagacity as he is in position, in any of these
colonies ; that he was for many years the intimate associate of his
late distinguished confrere, Archbishop HUGHES, of New York ; that he
knows the United States as thoroughly as he does the provinces, and these
are his views on this particular point ; the extract is somewhat long,
but so excellently put that I am sure the House will be obliged to me
for the whole of it :-
Instead of cursing, like the boy in the upturned boat, and
holding on until we are fairly on the brink of the cateract we must at
once begin to pray and strike out for the shore by all means,
before we get too far down on the current. We must at this most critical
moment invoke the Arbiter of nations for wisdom, and abandoning in
time our perilous position, we must strike out boldly, and at some risk,
for some rock on the nearest shore—some resting place of greater
security. A cavalry raid or a visit from our Fenian friends on horseback,
through the plains of Canada and the fertile valleys of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia,
may cost more in a single week than
Confederation for the next fifty years ; and if we are to believe you,
where is the security even at the present moment against such a disaster ? Without
the whole power of the Mother Country by
land and sea, and the concentration in a single hand of all the strength
of British America, our condition is seen at a glance. Whenever
the present difficulties will terminate—and who can tell the moment
?—we will be at the mercy of our neighbors ; and victorious or otherwise,
they will be eminently a military people, and with their apparent
indifference about annexing this country, and all the friendly feelings
that may be talked, they will have the power to strike when they
please, and this is precisely the kernel and the only touch point of the
whole question. No nation ever had the power of conquest that did
not use it, or abuse it, at the very first favorable opportunity. All
that is said of the magnanimity and forbearance of mighty nations can be
explained on the principle of sheer inexpediency, as the
world knows. The whole face of Europe has been changed, and the
dynasties of many hundred years have been swept away within our own time,
on the principle of might alone—the oldest, the
strongest, and as some would have it, the most sacred of all
titles. The thirteen original states of America, with all their
professions of self- denial, have been all the time, by
money, power and by war, and by negotiation, extending their
frontier until they more than quadrupled their territory within
sixty years ; and believe it who may, are they now of their own accord to
come to a full stop ? No ; as long as they have the power, they
must go onward : for it is the very nature of power to grip whatever is
within its reach. It is not their hostile feelings, therefore, but it is
their power, and only their power, I dread ; and I now state it, as
my solemn conviction, that it becomes the duty of every British subject
in these provinces to control that power, not by the insane policy
of attacking or weakening them, but by strengthening ourselves—rising,
with the whole power of Britain at our back, to their level ; and
so be prepared for any emergency. There is no sensible or unprejudiced
man in the community who does not see that vigorous and timely preparation is the
only possible means of saving us from the
horrors of a war such as the world has never seen. To be fully prepared is
the only practical argument that can have weight with a powerful
enemy, and make him pause beforehand and count the cost. And as the sort
of preparation I speak of is utterly hopeless without the
union of the provinces, so at a moment when public opinion is being
formed on this vital point, as one deeply concerned, I feel it a duty to
declare myself unequivocally in favor of Confederation as cheaply and
as honorably as possible—but Confederation at all hazards an at
all reasonable sacrifices.
After the most mature consideration, and all the arguments I have heard
on both sides for the last month, these are my inmost convictions, on
the necessity and merits of a measure which alone, under
Providence, can secure to us social order and peace, and rational
liberty, and all the blessings we now enjoy under the mildest
Government and the hallowed institutions of the freest and happiest
country in the world.
These are the words of a statesman—of a mitred statesman—one of that order
of mighty men, powerful in their generation, whose statesmanly gifts
have been cast in the strong mould of theological discipline—such men
as were XIMENES and WOLSEY. No one more deprecates than I do the interference of
clergymen in mere party politics, and I think such is
the sentiment also of His Grace of Halifax ; but when it is an issue of
peace or war, of deliverance or conquest, who has a better, who so
good a right to speak as the ministers of the gospel of peace, and
justice, and true freedom ? Observe once more these two closing sentences, " I feel
it a duty" says the illustrious Archbishop, "
to declare myself unequivo134cally in favor of Confederation as cheaply and as honorably
obtained as possible, but Confederation at all hazards and at all
reasonable sacrifices. After the most mature consideration, and all the
arguments I have heard on both sides for the last month, these are my
inmost convictions on the necessity and merits of a measure which alone,
under Providence, can secure to us social order and peace, and
rational liberty, and all the blessings we now enjoy under the mildest
Government and the hallowed institutions of the freest and happiest
country in the world." (Hear, hear.) The next motive for union to which I
shall refer is, that it will strengthen rather than weaken the
connection with the empire, so essential to these rising provinces. Those
who may be called, if there are any such, the anti-unionists, allege,
that this scheme here submitted will bring separation in its train.
How, pray ? By making these countries more important, will you
make them less desirable as connections to England ? By making their
trade more valuable, will you make her more anxious to get rid of it ?
By reducing their Federal tariff will you lessen their interest for England
? By making them stronger for each other's aid, will you make her less
willing to discharge a lesser than a greater responsibility
? But if the thing did not answer itself, England has answered that she
" cordially approves" of our plan of union, —and she has always been
accounted a pretty good judge of her own Imperial interests. (Hear,
hear.) She does not consider our union inimical to those interests. Instead
of looking upon it with a dark and discouraging frown, she
cheers us on by her most cordial approval and bids us a hearty " God
speed" in the new path we have chosen to enter. (Hear, hear.) But I put it
on provincial grounds as well. We are not able to go alone, and if we
attempted it we would almost certainly go to our own destruction—so
that as we cannot go alone, and as we do not desire union with the
United States, it is the duty of every man to do all in his power to
strengthen the connection with Great Britain. And how shall we
do it ? Is it by compelling the Imperial Government to negotiate at
Charlottetown, for every man and musket required for our defence, to
negotiate again at Halifax, and again at Frederickton, and again at St.
John, and again at Quebec ? Is it by having these five
separate governments that we
are to render the connection desirable and appreciated, or is it by
putting the power of these colonies into the hands of one General
Government and making the negotiations between two parties only, thereby
simplifying the whole transaction and expediting whatever is
to be done between the two countries. (Hear, hear.) I will content myself,
Mr. SPEAKER, with those principal motives to union ; first, that we
are in the rapids, and must go on ; next that our neighbors will not,
on their side, let us rest supinely, even if we could do so from other
causes ; and thirdly, that by making the united colonies more valuable
as an ally to Great Britain, we shall strengthen rather than weaken the
Imperial connexion. (Cheers) Let me now, sir, call your attention to
the difficulties, past and present, which this great project had to
encounter, before it reached the fortunate stage in which we now find it.
When it was first advocated by individuals, however eminent, of course
it had but scanty chance of success. (Hear, hear.) That was the first
stage ; when, as in 1822 and 1839, it found favor with Downing street, it
excited the suspicions of the colonists ; when it was identified with
the Quebec and Halifax railway project, it shared the fate,—it was
sacrificed to the jealousies and dissensions which destroyed that particular
undertaking. When, as in the case of my hon. friend (Mr. GALT'S)
motion in 1858, and my own motion in 1860, the subject was mooted in this
House by a private member, the Ministry of the day could not allow so
grave a measure to succeed in other hands than their own ; when, as
was the case in 1858, the Ministry committed themselves to it, the
Opposition complained that Parliament had not been consulted. When
Canada proposed to move, in 1859, Newfoundland alone responded ; when
Nova Scotia moved, in 1860, New Brunswick alone agreed to go with her ; at
all events, Canada did not then consent. (Hear, hear.) Of late years
the language of the Colonial Office, of Mr. LABOUOHERE, of Sir BULWER
LYTTON, and of the lamented Duke of NEWCASTLE, was substantially : "
Agree among yourselves, gentlemen, and we will not stand in the way." Ah !
there was the rub—" Agree among yourselves !" Easier said than done,
with five colonies so long estranged, and whose former negotiations had generally
ended in bitter controversies. Up to the
last year there was no conjunction of circumstances favorable to the
bringing about of this union, and
135 probably if we suffer this opportunity to be wasted
we shall never see again such a conjunction of circumstances as
will enable us to agree, even so far, among ourselves. By a most
fortunate concurrence of circumstances —by what I presume to call, speaking
of events of this magnitude, a providential concurrence of
circumstances—the Government of Canada was so modified last spring
as to enable it to deal fearlessly with this subject, at the very
moment when the coast colonies, despairing of a Canadian union, were
arranging a conference of their own for a union of their own. Our Government
embraced among its members from the western section the leaders of the
former Ministry and former Opposition from that section. At the time
it was formed it announced to this House that it was its intention as part of its
policy to seek a conference with the lower colonies,
and endeavor to bring about a general union. This House formally gave
the Government its confidence after the announcement of this policy, and
although I have no desire to strain terms, it does appear to me that
this House did commit itself to the principle of a union of the
colonies if found practicable. That is my view, sir, of the relations
of this House to the Government after it gave it expressly its
confidence. Other members of the House take another view of that matter,
they do not think themselves committed even to the principle, and they
certainly are not to the details of the scheme. (Hear.) After the
Coalition was formed an incident occurred, which, though not of national
importance, it would be most ungrateful of me to forget. An
intercolonial excursion was proposed and was rendered practicable through
the public spirit of two gentlemen representing our great railway, of
which so many hard things have been said that I feel it my duty to say
this good thing—I refer to the Honorable Mr. FERRIER and Mr. BRYDGES.
(Cheers.) Forty members of this House, twenty-five members of the
other House, and forty gentlemen of the press and other professions, from
Canada, joined in that excursion. So many Canadians had
never seen so much of the Lower Provinces before, and the people of the
Lower Provinces had never seen so many Canadians. Our reception was
beyond all description kind and cordial. The general sentiment of
union was everywhere cheered to the echo, though I am sorry to find that
some of those who cheered then, when it was but a general sentiment,
seem to act very
differently now, that it has become a ripened project, and I fear that
they do not intend to act up to the words they then uttered. They may,
perhaps, intend to do so, but they have a very odd way of going about it.
(Laughter.) Well, sir, this was in August ; the Charlottetown
Conference was called in September, the Quebec Conference in October, and the tour
of the maritime delegates through Canada
took place in November. Four months of the eight which have elapsed
since we promised this House to deal with it have been almost wholly given
up to this great enterprise. Let me bear my tribute, Mr. SPEAKER, now
that I refer to the Conference, to the gentlemen from the Lower
Provinces, who sat so many days in council with us under this roof.
(Cheers) A very worthy citizen of Montreal, when I went up a day or
two in advance of the Montreal banquet, asked me, with a curious sort of
emphasis—"What sort of people are they ?" —meaning the maritime
delegates. I answered him then, as I repeat now, that they were, as a
body, as able and accomplished a body as I thought any new country
in the world could produce,—and that some among them would compare not
unfavorably in ability and information with some of the leading
commoners of England. As our Government included a representation both
of the former Opposition, and the former Ministry, so their delegations were
composed in about equal parts of the Opposition and Ministerial
parties of their several provinces. A more hard-working set of men ; men
more tenacious of their own rights, yet more considerate for
those of others ; men of readier resources in debate ; men of gentler
manners ; men more willing to bear and forbear, I never can hope to
see together at one council table again. (Cheers) But why need I dwell
on this point ? They were seen and heard in all our principal cities, and I
am sure every Canadian who met them here was proud of them as
fellow-subjects, and would be happy to feel that he could soon call them
fellow-countrymen in fact as well as in name. (Cheers.) Sir, by this
combination of great abilities—by this coalition of leaders who never
before acted together—by this extraordinary armistice of party warfare,
obtained in every colony at the same moment —after all this labor and
all this self-sacrifice —after all former impediments had been most
fortunately overcome—the treaty was concluded and signed by
us all—and there it lies on your table. The propositions contained in
136 it have been objected to, and we were reminded the other evening by the honorable
member for Chateauguay,
that we are not a treaty- making power. Well, in reference to
that objection, I believe the Imperial Government has in
certain cases, such as the Reciprocity Treaty, conceded to these
provinces the right of coaction ; and in this case there is the
Imperial Despatch of 1862 to Lord MULGRAVE, Governor of Nova
Scotia, distinctly authorizing the public men of the colonies
to confer with each other on the subject of union, and writing them to
submit the result of their conferences to the Imperial
Government. (Hear, hear.) We assembled under authority of that despatch, and
acted under the sanction it gave. Everything we did was done in form
and with propriety, and the result of our proceedings is the document that has been
submitted to the Imperial
Government as well as to this House, and which we speak of here as a treaty.
And that there may be no doubt about our position in regard
to that document we say, question it you may, reject it you may,
or accept it you may, but alter it you may not. (Hear, hear.) It is
beyond your power, or our power, to alter it. There is not a sentence—
ay, or even a word—you can alter without desiring to throw out the document.
Alter it, and we know at once what you mean—you thereby declare
yourselves anti-unionists. (Hear, hear.) On this point, I repeat after
all my hon. friends who have already spoken, for one party to alter a
treaty, is, of course, to destroy it. Let us be frank with each other
; you who do not like our work, nor do you like us who stand by it, clause
by clause, line by line, and letter by letter. Oh ! but this clause
ought to run thus, and this other clause thus. Does any hon. member seriously think
that any treaty in the world between five
separate provinces ever gave full and entire satisfaction on every
point to every party ? Does any hon. member seriously expect to
have a constitutional act framed to his order, or my order, or any man's
order ? No, sir, I am sure no legislator at least since ANACHARSIS
CLOOTZ was "Attorney General of the Human Race" ever expected such ideal
perfection. (Laughter.) It may be said by some hon. gentleman that they
admit the principle of this measure to be good, but that it should be dealt
with as an ordinary parliamentary subject in the usual parliamentary
manner. Mr. SPEAKER, this is not an ordinary parliamentary measure. We do not legislate
upon it—we do
not enact it,—that is for a higher authority. Suppose the Address
adopted by this House tomorrow, is the act of this House final and
conclusive ? No. It is for the Imperial Parliament to act upon it.
(Hear, hear.) It will be that body that will cause the several
propositions to be moulded into a measure which will have the form of law,
and these resolutions will probably be the ipsissima verba of the measure they will give us and the other
provinces. But some hon. gentlemen opposite say, that if there be defects in this
measure they ought to be remedied
now, and that the Government ought to be glad to have them pointed out. Yes,
surely, if this were simply the act of the Parliament of Canada ; but it
is not to be our act alone. It is an Address to the Throne, in the terms
of which other colonies are to agree, and even if we were to make alterations in
it, we cannot bind them to accept them. If we were
weak and wicked enough to alter a solemn agreement with the other
provinces, the moment their representatives had turned their backs and
gone home, what purpose would it serve except that of defeating the whole measure
and throwing it as well as the country back again
into chaos. (Hear, hear.) I admit, sir, as we have been told, that we
ought to aim at perfection, but who has ever attained it, except perhaps the
hon. member for Brome. (Laughter.) We, however, did strive and aim at
the mark, and we think we made a tolerably good shot. The hon. member
for Chateauguay will not be satisfied—insatiate archer !—unless we hit
the bull's eye. (Laughter.) My hon. friend is well read in political
literature—will he mention me one authority, from the first to the last,
who ever held that human government ever was or could be anything
more than what a modern sage called "an approximation to the
right," and an ancient called " the possible best." Well, we believe we
have here given to our countrymen of all the provinces the possible
best—that we have given it to them in the most imperative moment—their representatives
and ours have labored at it, letter and spirit,
form and substance, until they found this basis of agreement, which we are all alike
confident will not now, nor for
many a day to come, be easily swept away. Before I pass to another
point, sir, permit me to pay my tribute of unfeigned respect to one of
our Canadian colleagues in this work, who is no longer with us ; I mean
the present Vice-Chancellor of Upper Canada (Hon. Mr. MOWAT), who
137 took a constant and honorable share in the
preparation of this project. (Cheers.) Now, sir, I wish to say a few words
in reference to what I call the social relations which I think ought
to exist and will spring up between the people of the Lower
Provinces and ourselves if there is a closer communication
established between us, and also in reference to the social fitness of each
of the parties to this proposed union. And first, I will make a remark
to some of the French Canadian gentlemen who are said to be opposed to our project,
on French Canadian grounds only. I will remind them,
I hope not improperly, that every one of the colonies we now
propose to re-unite under one rule—in which they shall have a potential
voice—were once before united, as New France. (Cheers.) Newfoundland,
the uttermost, was theirs, and one large section of its
coast is still known as "the French shore ;" Cape Breton was theirs till the
final fall of Louisburgh ; Prince Edward Island was their Island of
St. Jean, and Charlottetown was their Port Joli ; in the heart of Nova
Scotia was that fair Acadian land, where the roll of LONGFELLOW'S noble
hexameters may any day be heard in every wave that breaks upon the
base of Cape Blomedon. (Cheers.) In the northern counties of New Brunswick,
from the Miramichi to the Matapediac, they had their forts and farms,
their churches and their festivals, before the English speech had ever
once been heard between those rivers. Nor is that tenacious Norman and
Breton race extinct in their old haunts and homes. I have heard one of
the members for Cape Breton speak in high terms of that portion of his
constituency, and I believe I am correct in saying that Mr. LE
VISCONTE, the late Finance Minister of Nova Scotia, was, in the
literal sense of the term, an Acadian. Mr. COZZANS, of New York, who wrote a
very readable little book the other day about Nova Scotia, describes
the French residents near the basin of Minas, and he says especially of the women,
" they might have stepped out of Normandy a
hundred years ago !" In New Brunswick there is more than one county,
especially in the north, where business, and law, and politics, require a
knowledge of both French and English. A worthy friend of ours, Hon.
Mr. MITCHELL, of Chatham, who was present at the earlier meetings of
the Conference, owed his first election for one of these counties, because
he was Pierre Michel, and could speak to
his French constituents in their own language.
I will, with leave of the House, read on this interesting subject a
passage from a very capital sketch of the French district of New
Brunswick in 1863, by Lieutenant Governor GORDON [it is in GALSTON'S Vacation Tourist for 1864], and
is exceedingly interesting throughout :-
The French population, which forms so large
a proportion among the inhabitants of the coun ties of Westmoreland, Kent
and Gloucester, appears to me as contented as the habitants of Victoria, but
hardly equally as well off. There was an air of comfort and bien-ĂŞtre about the large timber
two-storied houses, painted a dark Indian red, standing among the trees, the
numerous good horses, the well-tilled fields and sleek cattle, which
is wanting on the sea coast. We stopped after a pleasant drive, affording us
good views of the beautiful peak of Green River Mountain, at the
house of a Monsieur VIOLET, at the mouth of Grand River, which was to
be our starting point. The whole aspect of the farm was that of the métairie
in Normandy—the outer doors of the house gaudily painted—the
panels of a different color from the frame—the large, open, uncarpeted room,
with its bare, shining floor—the lasses at the spinning-wheel—the
French costume and appearance of Madame VIOLET and her sons and
daughters, all carried me back to the other side of the
Atlantic. After a short conversation with the VIOLETS, we walked
down to the bridge, where two log-canoes, manned by Frenchmen—three CYRS
and a THIBAUDEAU—were waiting for us, and pushed off from the shore. A
turn in the river very speedily hid from us the bridge and farm, our
empty carriage, and the friends who had accompanied us from Grand
Falls standing on the bank, in the evening sunshine, waving us their
farewells, and it was not without pleasure that we felt that the same turn
which screened them from our view separated us for some time to come from
civilized life.
It will be observed Governor GORDON speaks of four counties in the north
of New Brunswick which still bear a marked French character. Well,
gentlemen of French origin, we propose to restore these
long-lost compatriots to your protection : in the Federal Union, which
will recognize equally both languages, they will naturally look to you ;
their petitions will come to you, and their representatives will
naturally be found allied with you. Suppose those four New Brunswick counties
are influenced by the French vote, and two in Nova Scotia, and one in
Newfoundland, you will, should you need them, have them as sure allies
to your own compact body, to aid your legitimate influence in the Federal
councils. (Cheers) I shall proceed with my outline analysis of the
maritime population, in order to establish the congruity and
138 congeniality of our proposed union. In point of
time, the next oldest element in that population is the Irish settlement of
Ferry- land, in Newfoundland, undertaken by Lord BALTIMORE
and Lord FALKLAND (Lord Lieutenant of Ireland at the time), immediately after the
restoration of King CHARLES I., soon after 1660.
Newfoundland still remains strongly Irish, as is natural, since it
is the next parish to Ireland—(laughter)and I think we saw a
very excellent specimen of its Irish natives at our Conference, in
AMBROSE SHEA. (Cries of hear, hear.) To me, I confess, it is particularly
grateful to reflect that the only Irish colony, as it may be called,
of our group, is to be included in the new arrangements. (Hear.) Another
main element in the Lower Province population is the Highland Scotch.
Large tracts of Prince Edward Island and Cape Breton were granted
after the Peace of Paris, to officers and men of FRAZER'S Highlanders
and other Scottish regiments, which had distinguished themselves during the
seven years' war. If my hon. friend from Glengarry (Mr. D.
A. MACDONALD) had been with us last September at Charlottetown, he
would have met clansmen, whom he would have been proud to know, and who
could have conversed with him in his own cherished Gaelic.
HON. MR. McGEE—So much the better for
the world. (Cheers.) And I will tell him what I think is to their honor,
that the Highlanders in all the provinces preserve
faithfully the religion, as well as the language and traditions, of their
fathers. The Catholic Bishop of Charlottetown is a McINTYRE ; his
Right Rev. brother of Arichat (Cape Breton) is a McKINNON ; and in
the list of the clergy, I find a constant succession of such
names as McDONALD, McGILLIS, McGILLIVRAY, McLEOD, McKENZIE and CAMERON—all "Anglo-Saxons"
of course, and mixed up
with them FOURNIERS, GAUVREAUS, PAQUETS and MARTELLS, whose origin is
easy to discover. (Cheers) Another of the original elements of that
population remains to be noticed—the U. E. Loyalists, who founded New
Brunswick, just as surely as they founded Upper Canada, for whom New
Brunswick was made a separate province in 1794, as Upper Canada was for
their relatives in 1791. Their descendants still flourish in the land,
holding many
positions of honor, and as a representative of the class, I shall only
mention Judge WILMOT, who the other day declared in charging one of
his grand juries, that if it were necessary to carry Confederation in
New Brunswick, so impressed was he with the necessity of the measure to the
very existence of British laws and British institutions, he
was prepared to quit the bench for politics. (Cheers.) There are other
elements also not to be overlooked. The thrifty Germans
of Lunenberg, whose homes are the neatest upon the land, as their fleet is
the tightest on the sea, and other smaller subdivisions ; but I shall
not prolong this analysis. I may observe, however, that this
population is almost universally a native population of three or four or
more generations. In New Brunswick, at the most there is
about twelve per cent. of an immigrant people ; in Nova Scotia,
about eight ; in the two islands, very much less. In the eye of the
law we admit no disparity between natives and immigrants in this country ;
but it is to be considered that where men are born in the presence of
the graves of their fathers, for even a few generations, the influence of
that fact is great in enhancing their attachment to that
soil. I admit, for my part, as an immigrant, of no divided allegiance to
Canada and her interests ; but it would be untrue and paltry to deny a
divided affection between the old country and the new. Kept within
just bounds, such an affection is reasonable, is right and
creditable to those who cherish it. (Hear, hear.) Why I refer to this
broad fact which distinguishes the populations of all the four
seaward provinces as much as it does Lower Canada herself, is, to show
the fixity and stability of that population ; to show that they
are by birth British Americans ; that they can nearly all, of every
origin, use that proud phrase when they look daily from their doors, "this
is my own, my native land." (Cheers.) Let but that population and ours
come together for a generation or two—such are the elements
that compose, such the conditions that surround it—and their mutual
descendants will hear with wonder, when the history of these present
transactions are written, that this plan of union could ever have been
seriously opposed by statesmen in Canada or elsewhere. (Cheers) I am told,
however, by one or two members of this House, and by
exclusively-minded Canadians out of it that they cannot entertain any
patriotic feel
139ing about this union with New Brunswick or Nova Scotia, and that
they cannot look with any interest at those colonies, with which we
have had hitherto so little association. " What's Hecuba to me, or I to
Hecuba?" Well, I answer to that, know them and my word for it, you
will like them. I have been on seven or eight journeys there, and have
seen much of the people, and the more I have seen of them, the more I
respected and esteemed them. (Hear, hear.) I say, then, to these
gentlemen, that if you want to feel any patriotism on the subject ; if you
want to stir up a common sentiment of affection between
these people and ourselves, bring us all into closer relation together, and
having the elements of a vigorous nationality with us, each will find
something to like and respect in the other ; mutual confidence and
respect will follow, and a feeling of being engaged in a common cause
for the good of a common nationality will grow up of itself without
being forced by any man's special advocacy. (Hear, hear.) The thing who
shuts up his heart against his kindred, his neighbors, and his
fellow-subjects, may be a very pretty fellow at a parish vestry, but do
you call such a forked-radish as that, a man ? (Laughter.) Don't so
abuse the noblest word in the language. (Hear, hear.) Sir, there is
one other argument for this union, or rather an illustration of its mutually
advantageous character, which I draw from the physical geography and
physical resources of the whole territory which it is proposed to unite ;
but before I draw the attention of the House to it, I may perhaps
refer to a charge that probably will be made against me, that I am
making what may appear to be a non-political speech. If it
be non-political in the sense of non-partisan, then I plead guilty to
the charge ; but I think that on some of the points to which I have alluded
the country is desirous of being informed, and as many hon. gentleman
have not had time to make a tour of the country to the east of us, those
who have had the opportunity of doing so cannot, I think, better
subserve the interest of the community than by giving what appears to
them a fair, just and truthful sketch of those provinces and their people,
and thus informing those in Canada who have not had the opportunity of
making observations for themselves on the spot. (Hear, hear.) It was
remarked by the late Sir JOHN BEVERLEY ROBINSON, in his letter to Lord
JOHN RUSSELL in 1839, that if the Bri
tish Government had
attempted to maintain the ancient boundaries of New France, in the
treaty which acknowledged the United States, it would have been impossible
to do so. These boundaries extend to Ohio on the south, and included
much of what is now called by our neighbours " the North-West." There
is great force, I think, in this observation. But in relation to
what I may call the ground-plan on which we propose to erect our
constitutional edifice, its natural oneness is admirable to contemplate.
There is not one port or harbour of all the provinces now proposing to
confederate, which cannot be reached from any other by all vessels, if not
of too great draught, without ever once leaving our own waters. From
the head of Lake Superior the same craft may coast uninterruptedly, always within
sight of our own shores nearly the distance of a
voyage to England—to St. John, Newfoundland. (Cheers) We
sometimes complain of our inland navigation, that we have it free
but half the year round, but what it lacks at one season, it amply
compensates by its vast capacity. (Cheers.) Last summer, when we visited
Halifax in the
Queen Victoria, which the
good people of that blockade running stronghold mistook for
a Confederate cruiser, we were the better part of a week steaming
away, always in British American waters, within sight of the bold and
beautiful coasts, which it was our privilege to call our own.
(Cheers.) While we were thus following our river system to the open sea, I
could not help often recurring to the vast extent of the whole. If any
hon. gentleman who has never made, and who cannot find time to make, a
journey through his own country, will only go to the library he will find an
excellent substitute for such a voyage in KEITH JOHNSTON'S
Physical Atlas, a book that when one opens
its leaves his brain opens with the book. ( Laughter.) He will find
that our matchless St. Lawrence drains an area of 298,000 square miles, of
which only 94,000 are occupied by the five great lakes taken together.
I shall not attempt to tread in the path of my two friends who sit next
me (Hon. Messrs. GALT and BROWN) by exhibiting in any detail
the prospects of mutual commercial advantages opened up by this union.
I have prepared a statement on this subject, giving certain general
results,which I do not present as complete, but only as
proximately correct—and which I now beg to read to the House :-
140
| TERRITORY |
POPULATION |
REPRESENTATION |
| PROVINCE |
No. of Square Miles. |
Comparative Size. |
No. of Acres under Cultivation,
1863. |
No. of Acres per Head. |
No. of Persons, 1861. |
Comparative Number. |
No. of Persons per Square
Mile |
- |
No. of Members proposed |
No. of Persons represented by each Member. |
- |
| Canada, Upper *............. |
120,260 |
28.91 |
6,051,619 |
4.33 |
1,396,091 |
42.38 |
11.51 |
........... |
85 |
17,025 |
........... |
| " Lower .......... |
210,020 |
52.48 |
4,804,235 |
4.32 |
1,111,566 |
33.75 |
5.29 |
.......... |
65 |
17,101 |
........... |
| Nova Scotia .......... |
18,671 |
4.46 |
1,027,792 |
3.10 |
330,857 |
10.04 |
17.72 |
.......... |
19 |
17,413 |
.......... |
| New Brunswick ........... |
27,105 |
6.46 |
835,108 |
3.25 |
252,047 |
7.65 |
9.29 |
.......... |
15 |
16,803 |
.......... |
| Prince Edward Island..... |
2,173 |
0.51 |
300,000 |
3.70 |
80,857 |
2.45 |
37.20 |
............ |
8 |
15,329 |
.......... |
| Newfoundland .......... |
40,200 |
9.58 |
.......... |
.......... |
122,638 |
3.73 |
3.05 |
.......... |
5 |
16,171 |
.......... |
| Totals .......... |
419,429 |
100.00 |
13,018,754 |
4.10 |
┼3,294,058 |
100.00 |
7.85 |
.......... |
194 |
16,979 |
.......... |
| * Canada.-The extent in square miles refers to known or surveyed
land, as the real extent is not known. |
┼All the calculations respecting population made
upin the census of 1861. |
|
| DEBT. |
REVENUE |
EXPENDITURE. |
EXCESS |
| PROVINCE |
1863. Amount. |
Comparative |
Amount per Head. |
1863. Amount. |
Comparative |
Amount per Head. |
1863. Amount. |
Comparative |
Amount per Head. |
Of Expenditure. |
Of Revenue |
|
$ |
|
$ |
$ |
|
$ |
$ |
|
$ |
$ |
$ |
| Canada............. |
67,293,994 |
85.14 |
26 82 |
9,760,816 |
77.94 |
3 89 |
10,742,807 |
80.46 |
4 28 |
982,491 |
........... |
| Nova Scotia .......... |
4,858,547 |
6.14 |
14 68 |
1,385,629 |
9.46 |
3 58 |
1,072,274 |
8.04 |
3 24 |
.......... |
313,355 |
| New Brunswick .......... |
5,702,991 |
7.21 |
22 62 |
899,991 |
7.18 |
3 56 |
884,613 |
6.62 |
3 50 |
.......... |
15,378 |
| Prince Edward Island ...... |
244,673 |
0.31 |
2 97 |
197,384 |
1.58 |
2 44 |
171,718 |
1.29 |
2 12 |
.......... |
25,666 |
| Newfoundland (1862)..... |
946,000 |
1.20 |
7 71 |
480,000 |
3.84 |
3 91 |
479,420 |
3.59 |
3 90 |
.......... |
580 |
| Totals .......... |
$79,012,206 |
100.00 |
$28 98 |
$12,523,320 |
100.00 |
$3 80 |
$13,350,832 |
100.00 |
$4 05 |
$982,491 |
$364,979 |
141
| IMPORTS. |
EXPORTS. |
- |
| PROVINCE |
1863. Amount |
Comparative. |
Amount per Head. |
1863. Amount. |
Comparative. |
Amount per Head. |
1863. Tonnage- In and Out. |
Average Tarriffs |
|
$ |
|
$ |
$ |
|
$ |
$ |
|
| Canada........... |
45,964,000 |
65.10 |
18 12 |
41,841,000 |
62.58 |
16 68 |
2,133,000 |
20 ÂŁ ct. |
| Nova Scotia.......... |
10,210,391 |
14.46 |
30 36 |
8,420,668 |
12.58 |
25 45 |
1,431,953 |
10 ÂŁ ct. |
| New Brunswick.......... |
7,764,824 |
11.00 |
30 80 |
8,984,784 |
13.44 |
35 56 |
1,386,980 |
15 1/2 ÂŁ ct. |
| Prince Edward Island..... |
1,428,028 |
2.02 |
17 66 |
1,627,540 |
2.43 |
20 12 |
No return. |
11 ÂŁ ct. |
| Newfoundland.......... |
5,242,720 |
7.42 |
42 75 |
6,002,212 |
8.97 |
48 96 |
" (6,907,000 |
10 ÂŁ ct. Lake.) |
| Totals.......... |
$70,600,963 |
100.00 |
$21 43 |
$66,846,604 |
100.00 |
$20 29 |
$11,854,934 |
13.3 ÂŁ ct. |
But there is one special source of wealth to be found in the Maritime
Provinces, which was not in any detail exhibited by my hon. friends—I
allude to the important article of coal. I think there can be no doubt that,
in some parts of Canada, we are fast passing out of the era of wood as
fuel, and entering on that of coal. In my own city every year, there
is great suffering among the poor from the enormous price of fuel, and large
sums are paid away by national societies and benevolent
individuals, to prevent whole families
perishing for want of fuel. I believe we must all conclude with Sir
WILLIAM LOGAN that we have no coal in Canada, and I may venture to
state, on my own authority, another fact, that we have—a five
months' winter, generally very cold. Now, what are the coal resources
of our maritime friends, to whose mines Confederation would give us
free and untaxed access forever ? I take these data from the authority in my
hand- from the highest authority on the subject— TAYLOR'S Coal Fields of the New World :-
Dr. A. GESNER, in a communication to the
Geological Society of London, 1843, states that the area of coal fields in
New Brunswick has been recently determined to be 7,500 square miles;
10,000 square miles, including Nova Scotia, but exclusive of Cape Breton.
Since his first report he has explored the whole of this vast region,
and has found the area covered by that coal formation to be no less than
8,000 square miles in New Brunswick. He says the most productive coal beds prevail
in the interior, while those of Nova Scotia
occur on the shores of her bays and rivers, where they offer every advantage for
mining operations. The coal fields of the two
provinces are united at the boundary line, and belong to the carboniferous
period . The developments of almost every season illustrate
more clearly the magnitude of these coal fields, which extend from
Newfoundland by Cape Breton, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, and
across a large portion of New Brunswick into the state of Maine. Mr.
HENWOOD, a geologist of high standing, observes that the beauty and
extent of these coal treasures it is impossible to describe. In Nova Scotia,
Dr. GESNER'S statements exhibit an area of coal formation of 2,500
square miles, while Messrs. LOGAN, DAWSON and BROWN greatly exceed
even that area. Sir W. E. LOGAN demonstrated by a laborious survey the
thickness or depth of the whole group in Northern Nova Scotia to
be over 2 3/4 miles, an amount which far exceeds anything seen in the coal
formation in other parts of North America ; in this group
there are seventy-six coal beds one above the other.
I must say, sir, that this is a cheering statement of facts,
coming to us on the very highest authority, and I feel warming with the subject,
even while making the statement.
(Laughter.) These exhaustless coal fields will, under this planwhich is in fact our
Reciprocity Treaty with the Lower
Provinces—become, hereafter, the great resource of our towns for fuel. I
see the cry is raised below by the anti-unionists that to
proceed with Confederation would be to entail the loss of the New England market
for their coals. I do not quite see how they make
that out, but even an
142 anti-unionist might see that the population of
Canada is within a fraction of that of all New England put together, that we
consume in this country as much fuel per annum as they do in all New
England ; and, therefore, that we offer them a market under the union
equal to that which these theorizers want to persuade their followers they
would lose. (Hear, hear.) Sir, another cry raised by the
anti-unionists below is, that they would have to fight for the defence of
Canada—a very specious argument. What, sir, three millions and one
million unite, and the one million must do the fighting for all. In proportion to
their numbers no doubt these valiant gentlemen
will have to fight, if fighting is to be done, but not one man or
one shilling more than Canada, pro rata,
will they have to fight or spend. On the contrary, the
greater community, if she should not happen to be first attacked, would be
obliged to fight for them, and in doing so, I do not
hesitate to say, on far better authority than my own, that the man who
fights for the valley and harbour of St. John, or even for Halifax,
fights for Canada. I will suppose another not impossible case. I
will suppose a hostile American army, on a fishery or any
other war, finding it easier and cheaper to seize the lower colonies by land
than by sea, by a march from a convenient rendezvous on Lake
Champlain, through Lower Canada, into the upper part of New Brunswick,
and so downward to the sea—a march like SHERMAN'S march from Knoxville to Savannah.
While we obstructed such a march by every
means in our power, from the Richelieu to Rivière du Loup, whose
battles would we be fighting then ? Why the seaports aimed at, for our
common subjugation. (Hear, hear.) But the truth is, all these selfish
views and arrangements are remarkably short-sighted, unworthy of the
subject, and unworthy even of those who use them. In a commercial, in a
military, in every point of view, we are all, rightly considered ,
dependant on each other. Newfoundland dominates the Gulf, and none
of us can afford to be separated from her. Lord CHATHAM said he would
as soon abandon Plymouth as Newfoundland, and he is said to
have understood how to govern men. Nova Scotia and New Brunswick are Siamese
twins, held together by that ligature of land between Baie Verte and
Cumberland Basin, and the fate of the one must follow the fate of the
other. (Hear, hear.) Prince Edward is only a little bit,
broken off by the Northumberland Strait from those two bigger brethren, and Upper
and Lower Canada are essential to each other's
prosperity. Our very physical outline teaches us the lesson of union,
and indicates how many mutual advantages we may all derive from
the treaty we have made. Mr. SPEAKER, while we in Canada have no doubt
of the ratification of the Intercolonial Treaty, by this House and
country, I cannot conceal from myself that our friends in the Lower
Provinces are fighting a battle with narrow views and vested
interests, which are always most bitter in the smallest communities. There
are coasting trade interests and railway interests at work ; and there
are the strong interests of honest ignorance and dishonest ingenuity. What
can these men mean, who are no fools ? Do they, too, fancy they can
get a government made to their own private order ? Do they think they
can go on the old system ? Do they mean to give up the country to the
Americans ? Why not hang up at once the sign, "these provinces for
sale—terms cash ! —' greenbacks ' taken at full value !" I rejoice to see the unionists
of the Maritime Provinces so resolved, so high
spirited and so united—and though their victory will not be won
without work, yet I feel assured it will be a victory. If the honest and
misguided would but reflect for a moment the risks they run by
defeating, or even delaying this measure, I am sure they would, even yet,
retract. (Hear, hear.) If we reject it now, is there any human
probability that we shall ever see again so propitious a set of
circumstances to bring about the same results? How they came about we
all know. (Hear, hear.) The strange and fortunate events that have
occurred in Canada; the extraordinary concessions made by the
leaders of the Governments below—Dr.TUPPER, the Nova Scotian
Premier, for instance, admitting to his confidence, and bringing
with him here as his co-representatives, Hon. Messrs. ARCHIBALD and
MCCULLY, two of his most determined political opponents—can we ever expect,
if we reject this scheme, that the same or similar things will occur
again to favor it? Can we expect to see the leader of the Upper Canadian conservative
party and the leader of the Upper Canadian
liberals sitting side by side again, if this project fails to work out, in a
spirit of mutual compromise and concession, the problem of our
constitutional difficulties ? No, sir, it is too much to expect. Miracles
143 would cease to be miracles if they were events of
every day occurrence ; the very nature of wonders requires that they should
be rare ; and this is a miraculous and wonderful circumstance, that men at the head
of the Governments in five
separate provinces, and men at the head of the parties opposing them, all
agreed at the same time to sink party differences for the
good of all, and did not shrink, at the risk of having their motives
misunderstood, from associating together for the purpose
of bringing about this result. (Cheers.) I have asked, sir, what risks do
we run if we reject this measure ? We run the risk of being swallowed
up by the spirit of universal democracy that prevails in the United
States. Their usual and favorite motto is-
No pent-up Utica contracts our powers,
But the whole boundless continent is ours.
That is the paraphrase of the Monroe doctrine. And the popular
voice has favored- ay, and the greatest statesmen among them have
looked upon it as inevitable—an extension of the principles of
democracy over this continent. Now, I suppose a universal democracy is no more acceptable
to us than a universal monarchy in Europe,
and yet for three centuries—from CHARLES V. to NAPOLEON—our
fathers combatted to the death against the subjection of all Europe to a
single system or a single master, and heaped up a debt
which has since burthened the producing classes of the Empire with
an enormous load of taxation, which, perhaps, none other
except the hardy and ever-growing industry of those little islands
could have borne up under. (Hear, hear.) The idea of a universal democracy in America
is no more welcome to the minds of
thoughtful men among us, than was that of a universal monarchy to the
mind of the thoughtful men who followed the standard of the third
WILLIAM in Europe, or who afterwards, under the great MARLBOROUGH,
opposed the armies of the particular dynasty that sought to place Europe
under a single dominion. (Hear, hear.) But if we are to have a
universal democracy on this continent, the Lower Provinces—the smaller
fragments—will be "gobbled up" first, and we will come in afterwards by way
of dessert. (Laughter.) The proposed Confederation will enable us to
bear up shoulder to shoulder ; to resist the spread of this universal
democracy doctrine ; it will make it more desirable to maintain on both
sides the connection that binds us to the parent State ; it will raise
us from the position of mere dependent colonies to a new and
more important position ; it will give us a new lease of existence under
other and more favorable conditions ; and resistance to this project,
which is pregnant with so many advantages to us and to our children,
means simply this, ultimate union with the United States. (Cheers.) But
these are small matters, wholly unworthy of the attention of
the SMITHS, and ANNANDS, and PALMERS, who have come forward to forbid
the banns of British American union. Mr. SPEAKER, before I draw to a close
the little remainder of what I have to say—and I am sorry to have
detained the House so long(cries of " No, no")—I beg to offer a
few observations apropos of my own
position as an English-speaking member for Lower Canada. I
venture, in the first place, to observe that there seems to be a
good deal of exaggeration on the subject of race, occasionally introduced, both
on the one side and the other, in this section
of the country. I congratulate my honorable friend the Attorney General for this
section on his freedom from such prejudices in
general, though I still think in matters of patronage and the like he
always thinks first of his own compatriots—(laughter)—for which
neither do I blame him. But this theory of race is sometimes
carried to an anti-christian and unphilosophical excess. Whose
words are those—" GOD hath made of one blood all the nations that dwell
on the face of the earth ?" Is not that the true theory of race ? For my
part, I am not afraid of the French Canadian majority in the
future Local Government doing injustice, except accidentally ;
not because I am of the same religion as themselves ; for origin and
language are barriers stronger to divide men in this world
than is religion to unite them. Neither do I believe that my Protestant
compatriots need have any such fear. The French Canadians
have never been an intolerant people ; it is not in their temper, unless they
had been persecuted, perhaps, and then it might have been as it has been
with other races of all religions. Perhaps, on this subject, the House
will allow me to read a very striking illustration of the tolerance of French
Canadian character from a book I hold in my hand, the Digest of the Synod Minutes of the Presbyterian
Church of Canada, by my worthy friend, the Rev. Mr. KEMP, of the
144 Free Church, of Montreal. The passage is on page
seven of the introduction :-
About the year 1790 the Presbyterians of
Montreal of all denominations, both British and American, organized
themselves into a Church, and in the following year secured the services of
the Rev. JOHN YOUNG. At this time they met in the Recollet Roman
Catholic Church, but in the year following they erected the edifice which is
now known as St. Gabriel Street Church—the oldest Protestant Church in
the province. In their early Minutes we find them, in acknowledgment of the kindness
of the Recollet Fathers, presenting them
with "One box of candles, 561bs., at 8d., and one hogshead of Spanish wine
at ÂŁ6 5s."
(Laughter.) I beg my hon. friends, who may have different notions of
Christian intercourse at this time of day, just to fancy doings of that
sort. (Hear, hear.) Here, on the one hand, are the Recollet Fathers
giving up one of their own churches to the disciples of JOHN KNOX to
enable them to worship GOD after their own manner, and perhaps to have a
gird at Popery in the meantime—(great laughter)- and here, on the other
hand, are the grateful Presbyterians presenting to these same Seminary priests wine
and wax tapers in acknowledgment
of the use of their church, for Presbyterian service. Certainly a more
characteristic instance of true tolerance on both sides can hardly be found
in the history of any other country. I cite this little incident to
draw from it this practical moral -that those who are seeking, and, in some
particulars, I believe justly seeking, the settlement of
Protestant education in Lower Canada on firmer ground than it now occupies, might
well afford to leave the two great Seminaries of
Montreal and Quebec at peace. No two institutions in Christendom ever
more conscientiously fulfilled the ends of their erection ; and whoever does
not know all, but even a little, of the good services they have
rendered to both the people and the Government of Lower Canada, to the
civilization and settlement of this country, has much yet to learn of the
history of Canada. (Hear, hear.) To close this topic, I have no doubt
whatever, with a good deal of moderation and a proper degree of firmness, all that
the Protestant minority in Lower Canada can
require, by way of security to their educational system, will be
cheerfully granted to them by this House. I, for one, as a Roman
Catholic, will cordially second and support any such amendments, properly framed.
I will merely add
in relation to an observation of my friend (Hon. Mr. BROWN) last night
on the subject of the Catholic Separate Schools of Upper
Canada, that I accepted for my own part, as a finality, the amended act of
1863. I did so because it granted all the petitioners asked, and I
think they ought to be satisfied. I will be no party to the re-opening of
the question ; but I say this, that if there are to be any special
guarantees or grants extended to the Protestant minority of Lower Canada,
I think the Catholic minority in Upper Canada ought to be
placed in precisely the same position—neither better nor worse. (Hear,
car.) At present I shall not add another word on this subject, as I am not
aware of the particular nature of the amendments asked for at present,
either east or west. (Hear, hear.) All who have spoken on this subject
have said a good deal, as was natural, of the interests at stake in the
success or failure of this plan of Confederation. I trust the House
will permit me to add a few words as to the principle of Confederation
considered in itself. In the application of this principle to former
constitutions, there certainly always was one fatal defect, the
weakness of the central authority. Of all the Federal constitutions I have
ever heard or read of, this was the fatal malady : they were
short-lived, they died of consumption. (Laughter.) But I am not prepared to
say that because the Tuscan League elected its chief magistrates for
two months and lasted a century, that therefore the Federal principle
failed. On the contrary, there is something in the frequent, fond recurrence
of mankind to this principle, among the freest people, in their best
times and worst dangers, which leads me to believe, that it has a very deep
hold in human nature itself—an excellent basis for a government to
have. But indeed, sir, the main question is the due distribution of
powers—a question I dare not touch tonight, but which I may be
prepared to say something on before the vote is taken. The principle
itself seems to me to be capable of being so adapted as to promote internal
peace and external security, and to call into action a genuine,
enduring and heroic patriotism. It is a fruit of this principle that makes
the modern Italian look back with sorrow and pride over a dreary waste
of seven centuries to the famous field of Legnano ; it was this principle kindled
the beacons which burn yet on the rocks of Uri ;
it was this principle that broke the dykes of Holland and overwhelm
145ed the Spanish with the fate of the Egyptian
oppressor. It is a principle capable of inspiring a noble ambition and a
most salutary emulation. You have sent your young men to guard your
frontier. You want a principle to guard your young men, and thus truly
defend your frontier. For what do good men (who make the
best soldiers) fight ?. For a line of scripture or chalk line—for a pretext
or for a principle ? What is a better boundary between nations than a
parallel of latitude, or even a natural obstacle ?—what really keeps
nations intact and apart ?—a principle. When I can hear our young
men say as proudly, " our Federation" or " our Country," or " our
Kingdom," as the young men of other countries do, speaking of their
own, then I shall have less apprehension for the result of whatever trials
the future may have in store for us. (Cheers.) It has been said that
the Federal Constitution of the United States has failed. I, sir, have
never said it. The Attorney General West told you the other night that he
did not consider it a failure ; and I remember that in 1861,
when in this House I remarked the same thing, the only man who then
applauded the statement was the Attorney General West—so that it is
pretty plain he did not simply borrow the argument for use the the
other night, when he was advocating a Federal union among ourselves. (Hear,
hear.) It may be a failure for us, paradoxical this may
seem, and yet not a failure for them. They have had eighty years' use
of it, and having discovered its defects, may apply a remedy and go on with
it eighty years longer. But we also are lookers on, who saw its
defects as the machine worked, and who have prepared contrivances by
which it can be improved and kept in more perfect order when applied to
ourselves. And one of the foremost statesmen in England,
distinguished alike in politics and literature, has declared, as the
President of the Council informed us, that we have combined
the best parts of the British and the American systems of government, and
this opinion was deliberately formed at a distance, without prejudice,
and expressed without interested motives of any description. (Hear,
hear.) We have, in relation to the head of the Government, in relation to
the judiciary, in relation to the second chamber of the Legislature,
in relation to the financial responsibility of the General Government,
and in relation to the public officials whose tenure of office is
during good behaviour, instead of at the caprice of a party—in all
these respects we have adopted the British system ; in other respects we
have learned something from the American system, and I trust and
believe we have made a very tolerable combination of both (Hear, hear.)
The principle of Federation is a generous principle. It is a principle
that gives men local duties to discharge, and invests them at the same
time with general supervision, that excites a healthy sense of
responsibility and comprehension. It is a principle that has produced
a wise and true spirit of statesmanship in all countries in which
it has ever been applied. It is a principle eminently
favorable to liberty, because local affairs are left to be dealt with by
local bodies and cannot be interfered with by those who have no local
interest in them, while matters of a general character are left
exclusively to a general goverment. It is a principle coincident with every
government that ever gave extended and important services
to a country, because all governments have been more or less
confederations in their character. Spain was a federation, for
although it had a king reigning over the whole country, it had its local
governments for the administration of local affairs. The British Isles
are a confederation, and the old French dukedoms were confederated in
the States General. It is a principle that runs through all the history of
civilization in one form or another, and exists alike in monarchies
and democracies ; and having adopted it as the principle of our future
government, there were only the details to arrange and agree upon. Those
details are before you. It is not in our power to alter any of them
even if the House desires it. If the House desires it can reject the treaty,
but we cannot, nor can the other provinces which took part in its
negotiation, consent that it shall be altered in the slightest particular. (Hear,
hear.) Mr. SPEAKER, I am sorry to have detained
the House so long, and was not aware till I had been some time on my
legs that my physical force was so inadequate to the exposition of these few
points which, not specially noticed by my predecessors in this debate,
I undertook to speak upon. We stand at present in this position : we
are bound in honor, we are bound in good faith, to four provinces
occupied by our fellow-colonists, to carry out
146 the measure agreed upon here in the last week of
October. We are bound to carry it to the foot of the Throne, and ask there
from Her Majesty, according to the first resolution of the Address,
that She will be graciously pleased to direct legislation to be had on this
subject. We go to the Imperial Government, the common
arbiter of us all, in our true Federal metropolis—we go there to ask
for our fundamental Charter. We hope, by having that Charter that can only
be amended by the authority that made it, that we will lay the basis
of permanency for our future government. The two great things that all
men aim at in any free government, are liberty and permanency. We have had
liberty enough—too much perhaps in some respects—but at all events,
liberty to our heart's content. There is not on the face of the earth
a freer people than the inhabitants of these colonies. But it is necessary
there should be respect for the law, a high central authority, the
virtue of civil obedience, obeying the law for the law's sake ; even
when a man's private conscience may convince him sufficiently that
the law in some cases may be wrong, he is not to set up his individual
will against the will of the country expressed through its recognised
constitutional organs. We need in these provinces, we can
bear, a large infusion of authority. I am not at all afraid this
Constitution errs on the side of too great conservatism. If it be
found too conservative now, the downward tendency in political
ideas which characterizes this democratic age, is a sufficient guarantee for amendment.
That is the principle on which this
instrument is strong and worthy of the support of every colonist, and
through which it will secure the warm approbation of the Imperial
authorities. We have here no traditions and ancient venerable
institutions ; here, there are no aristocratic elements hallowed by time or
bright deeds ; here, every man is the first settler of the land, or
removed from the first settler one or two generations at the furthest ;
here, we have no architectural monuments calling up old associations ;
here, we have none of those old popular legends and stories which in
other countries have exercised a powerful share in the government ; here,
every man is the son of his own works. (Hear, hear.) We have none of
those influences about us which, elsewhere, have their effect upon
government just as much as the invisible atmosphere itself tends to
influence life, and animal and vegetable
existence. This is a new land—a land of pretension because it is new ;
because classes and systems have not had that time to grow here
naturally. We have no aristocracy but of virtue and talent, which is the
only true aristocracy, and is the old and true meaning of the term.
(Hear, hear.) There is a class of men rising in these colonies, superior in
many respects to others with whom they might be compared. What I
should like to see is—that fair representatives of the Canadian and
Acadian aristocracy, should be sent to the foot of the Throne with that
scheme, to obtain for it the royal sanctiona scheme not
suggested by others, or imposed upon us, but one the work of ourselves, the
creation of our own intellect and of our own free, unbiassed and
untrammelled will. I should like to see our best men go there, and
endeavor to have this measure carried through the Imperial Parliament—going
into Her Majesty's presence, and by their manner, if not actually by
their speech, saying—" During Your Majesty's reign we have had
Responsible Government conceded to us ; we have administered it for nearly a
quarter of a century, during which we have under it doubled our
population and more than quadrupled our trade. The small colonies which your ancestors
could scarcely see on the map have grown into
great communities. A great danger has arisen in our near
neighborhood. Over our homes a cloud hangs, dark and heavy. We do not know
when it may burst. With our own strength we are not able to combat
against the storm, what we can do, we will do cheerfully and loyally.
But we want time to grow—we want more people to fill our country, more
industrious families of men to develope our resources—we want to increase
our prosperity—we want more extended trade and commerce—we want more land tilled—more
men established through our wastes and
wildernesses. We of the British North American Provinces
want to be joined together, that if danger comes, we can support each other
in the day of trial. We come to Your Majesty, who have given
us liberty, to give us unity, that we may preserve and perpetuate our
freedom ; and whatsoever Charter, in the wisdom of Your Majesty and of Your
Parliament, you give us, we shall loyally obey and fulfil
it as long as it is the pleasure of Your Majesty and Your Successors to
maintain the connection between Great Britain and these Colonies."
(The hon. gentleman then sat down amid prolonged cheers.)
147
ATTY. GEN. MACDONALD moved that the
debate be adjourned till Thursday, 13th instant, and be then the first Order
of the Day, after half-past seven.
HON. MR. HOLTON said :—MR. SPEAKER, we on this side had some doubt lest the Opposition might
be placed at a disadvantage, by allowing the speeches of the
Government to go to the country, without any comment on
them. But if these five speeches, to which we have now listened,
contain all that can be said in favor of this scheme, we have no fear
of letting them go unanswered. I listened to the speech of the
Attorney General West with great disappointment. The cause
of that disappointment was simple enough. The hon. gentleman was, in
that speech, giving the lie to twenty years of his political life. He was
offering to the cause he is now advocating one speech against his
continuous voice and vote for twenty years. He was struggling, all through
that speech, against the consciousness of the falseness of his
political position, and what every one conceived would be the brightest
effort of his life was the feeblest address he ever delivered on any
important question, during the twenty years he has sat in this House.
The Attorney General West was followed by the Attorney General East. I
know not how to characterize the speech of that hon. gentleman, further than
to say that it was quite characteristic. It was perfectly
characteristic. I doubt whether any attorney general who ever
existed, since attorneys general were first invented, besides that
hon. gentleman, could have delivered, on an occasion like this, the speech
which he delivered. It may be said of that hon. gentleman, as the poet said of a very
different style of man—one who was not
an hon. gentleman in the sense in which we are now
speaking—" None but himself can be his parallel " (Laughter.) No attorney
general, I repeat, since attorneys general were first
invented, could have delivered a speech at all like that pronounced by the
Attorney General East, in opening his side of the great question now
submitted to the consideration of Parliament. Then followed the singularly able speech
of my hon. friend the Finance
Minister, which was delivered with all that ease and grace that mark all his
efforts in this House, and with that fluency of diction which
we all admire, and which I am always ready to acknowledge. But I think
it will also be admitted by that hon. gentle
man's own
friends, that his speech was chiefly remarkable for an adroit avoidance of
the very topics on which he was expected, or might have been expected,
to address the House, and for a very adroit assumption of those very
things which he might have been expected to prove. Such, at least, was the
impression which that speech made upon my mind. Then came the
speech—the herculean effort—of my hon. friend, the President
of the Council, who, I am sorry to see, is not in his seat, and with
reference, therefore, to whose speech I shall not make the remarks I
might have done, if he were in his place. I must say, however, that that
speech was a disappointing speech. (Cries of " oh ! oh !" and " hear,
hear") I did expect, from the conspicuous part which that hon. gentleman
has so long played in the politics of the country—from the leading
part he has had in all the proceedings which have conducted
to the project now before the Housethat we should have had from
him, at all events, some vindication of the steps which he has seen
fit to take—some vindication of the principles of the proposed union, so
contrary to all those principles which he has hitherto
advocated. I say, we did expect that we would have had something of that
kind from that hon. gentleman. But, instead of that, his
whole speech was mainly an apology for his abandonment of all those
objects for which he has contended through his political life, saving only
the shadow of representation by population, to attain which shadow he
seems to have sacrificed all the material objects, all the real objects, for
the attainment of which the agitation for that change has proceeded on
his part. Then we have had, to-night, the speech of my hon. friend,
the Minister of Agriculture, a speech which I admit was one of very great
interest, as a historical essay—one which will read very
nicely in those reports which we are to get in a few days—one which does
very great credit to his literary research and literary taste—but one,
which I do venture to say, had very little practical bearing on the
question that is now before us. Well, I repeat, I am not afraid that these
speeches should go to the country unanswered. The country will see that
these hon. gentlemen have utterly failed to establish a cause for
revolution. They are proposing revolution, and it was incumbent upon
them to establish a necessity for revolution. All revolutions are unjustifiable, except
on the ground
148 of necessity. These hon. gentlemen were, therefore,
bound to establish this necessity. The country will see too, that they have
failed to explain, to vindicate and to justify the disregard of
parliamentary law and of parliamentary usage by which they are attempting to extort
from this House an assent, not
merely to the principle of union- which would be perfectly proper—but to all
the clumsy contrivances adopted by that self- constituted
junta which sat in Quebec a few weeks since, for giving effect to that
union, and to all those huxtering arrangements by which the
representatives of the Lower Provinces were induced to give in
their adhesion, and, so far as they could, the adhesion of their provinces to this
scheme. I say, they quite failed to explain
this and to vindicate it. The country too will see that these
hon. gentlemen have carefully refrained from entering into any
explanation of the concomitants of this scheme—of the proposed
constitutions of the local governments for instance, which are, at
least, as important as the Constitution of the Federal Government. It is quite manifest
that a union, even if generally desirable,
might become undesirable from the bad, or inconvenient, or expensive
arrangements incident to the adoption of that union. And that really explains the
position of many hon. gentlemen in this House,
who, like myself, are not opposed to the Federal principle, but
who find themselves obliged to go counter apparently to their own
convictions, because they cannot accept a union clogged with such
conditions as this union is. (Hear, hear.) Then it might
have been expected that some further, some more distinct,
information might have been given than has been given, on the
all-important question of education, in respect of which, we have
been given to understand, that some final and permanent system
will be enacted by this Legislature, in view of the proposed
federation of the provinces. We might also have expected that some information would
have been vouchsafed to us in respect to the
Intercolonial Railway- which we are in fact voting for, without having
gone into Committee of the Whole. Without having in point of fact any
information with regard to it whatever, we are voting the cost of that
road, so far as this Legislature can do so—a road which will certainly cost
us $20,000,000, and, for aught we know, may cost us $40,000,000. I do
think we should
have had some information with respect to that road from those hon.
gentlemen, in order that the whole case might have gone to the
country. (Hear, hear.) And then, with respect to the defences of the
country- what sort of utterances have we had on that subject ? We were
told by the President of the Council that the subject was engaging the
attention of the Imperial Government, and he vindicated union, because
defence can be better given by united, than by separate colonies. And
what have we been told tonight by the Minister of Agriculture ?
That despatches are received by every second mail from England telling
us that we are entering on a new era with reference to the question of
defence. What does all this mean ? It means that, in connection with this
union, we are to have entailed upon us untold expenditures
for the defence of the country. (Hear, hear.) Ought they not to place this
information, these despatches, before the House and the country,
before any final and irrevocable action is taken with regard to the
scheme ? These are a few, and but a few, of the leading topics which
constitute the contents of this scheme of Federation, in respect to
which we had a right to expect the fullest possible information, but in
respect to which hon. gentlemen have either maintained a
studied reserve, or have spoken, like the Delphic oracles, in language which
defies interpretation. (Laughter.) I say, then, let these speeches go
to the country, and if the country, by perusing them, is not awakened
to the dangers which threaten it from the adoption of this crude, immature,
ill-considered scheme of hon. gentlemen—a scheme which threatens to
plunge the country into measureless debt—into difficulties
and confusions utterly unknown to the present constitutional
system—imperfect as that system confessedly is—if the country is not
awakened to a sense of its danger by the perusal of these speeches—I do not
say I will despair of my country, for I will never despair of my
country—(cheers)—but I anticipate for my country a period of calamities, a period
of tribulation, such as it has never
heretofore known. (Cheers and counter cheers.)
The motion for the adjournment of the debate was agreed to, and the House
then adjourned.
This individual participated in:
