LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.
MONDAY, February
20, 1865.
MR. JOLY said—Mr. SPEAKER, when it
is proposed to change the Constitution of
the country, it becomes our duty to study
with the greatest care, and from every distinct point of view, the new Constitution
which it is proposed to substitute for the
existing one; and in doing so we ought not
to disdain the experience of past ages
347
History
is the statesman's safest guide ; it
ought to be the basis of all his conceptions ;
indeed it would be treating its lessons with
contempt, were we to attempt to dispose of
the future without first knowing how Providence has disposed of the past. To make
use of a maxim, common, but yet most truthful: " There is nothing new under the sun;"
the history of the world is a constantly
revolving scene ; the same events pass and
repass before our eyes under aspects varied
enough, it is true, to deceive the superficial
observer, but the man who thinks and
investigates will have no difficulty in discovering that at all periods of the world's
history, men have allowed themselves to be
controlled by the same motives
and passions,
and will arrive at the
inevitable conclusion
that like causes produce like effects. The
honorable ministers who have unfolded to
us the scheme of Confederation have based
all their arguments on the future ; they
have tried to prophecy, but for them the
history of the past is a dead letter. Before
attempting to predict the fate of our future
Confederation, they should first have told us
what had been the fate of past confederations. It does not suffice to paint a splendid
picture of grandeur and prosperity ; let it
first be ascertained that the foundations on
which the edifice is to be erected are sure
and proved, and that established, we may
then begin to build with safety. As has
been said by one of the great professors of
political science : " The wisdom of a statesman is the result of experience and not
of
theory." I am by no means astonished,
however, at the repugnance evinced by the
advocates of Confederation to make allusion
to the past. The Minister of
Agriculture
alone has had the courage to open the
volume of the world's history, and he hastily
closed it with the significant remark, especially so falling from his lips:-
In
all the constitutions in which the Federal
principle has been adopted, it
cannot be denied
that the same fatal vice is to
be discerned—the
weakness of the central
authority. This has been
the fatal disease in all
confederations of which I
have heard, or whose histories I have read. They
have died of consumption.
What the Government has not been willing
to do, I now propose to do. Let us take
counsel of those nations which have adopted
federative constitutions, and may the recital
of their unhappy experience be of use to us
by placing us on our guard against the same
dangers. I propose to cast a brief glance
on the history of each Confederation. I do
not propose to lay before you my own views,
and ask you to adopt them, but
rather those
of men of eminence, who have
made the art
of good government the study of
their lives.
I shall indeed make use, as
nearly as I
possibly can, of the very language which
they have used. Lord BROUGHAM, who is
listened to with profound
respect in the
Imperial Parliament, thus
expresses his
views in the third part of his work on
Political Philosophy:-
Besides the other defects of the Federal
union,
its manifest tendency to create mutual estrangement, and even hostility,
between the different
parts of the same nation, is an
insuparable objection to it.
And further on he adds:-
Whoever would see further proofs of this
position, may be referred to the ancient common~
wealths of Greece. As a Florentine hated a
Siennese worse than a German or a Spaniard, or
even an infidel, in modern times, so of old did an
Athenian hate a Spartan or a Theban worse than
a Persian. Now, the Federal union, by keeping
up a line of separation among its members, gives
the freest scope to these pernicious prejudicesfeelings which it is the highest duty
of
all governments to eradicate because they lead directly to
confusion and war.
Passing from the confederacies of Greece
and Italy to those of the Seven United Provinces (now Holland and Belgium), we there
find the same state of things. Let us hear
what Lord MACAULAY says in the first
volume of his History of England:-
The union of Utrecht, hastily established
amid
the throes of a revolution, with the view of providing for the exigencies of the moment,
had
never been considered with calmness, nor brought
to perfection in a period of tranquillity. Each
one of the Seven Provinces, which this union
bound together in one cluster, retained nearly all
the rights of sovereignty, and exacted from the
Federal Government the most absolute respect of
its rights. As the Federal authorities had no
means of enforcing prompt obedience from the
Provincial
authorities, so these latter were equally
powerless as regarded the Municipal authorities.
The advocates of Confederation take pleasure
in citing the result of the Swiss (or Helvetic)
Confederacy as an exception to the disastrous fate awaiting all confederations; but
Switzerland possesses all the germs of this
fatal malady, as witness the civil and religious war of the Sonderbund. Here, however,
the symptoms are less violent than
in other confederations, on account of its
348
exceptional position ; France, Prussia
and
Austria are deeply interested in maintaining
the existence of Switzerland as a neutral and
independent state —it is indispensable to their
safety. Were it not so, the last hour of the
Helvetic Confederacy would have sounded
long ago. If we pass from the confederations of the old world to those of the
new, we shall find that the climate of America appears to be still more fatal to confederations
than that of Europe. Let us begin
with the Central American Confederacy or
Republic of Guatemala. It was established
in 1821, and was composed of five states:
Guatemala, Honduras, San Salvador, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica. In 1829, that is to
say, after an interval of eighteen years only,
Honduras set the example by seceding from
the Confederation, an example which was very
soon followed by the four other states, and
that Confederation has ceased to exist, after
a brief existence, in the midst of revolutions and civil wars. The Confederation of
Columbia was formed in 1819 of the twelve
provinces freed by Bolivar from the dominion
of Spain. After endless troubles and revolutions, they separated in 1831 (after an
existence of 12 years) into three
independent republics, though reunited under the
name of Confederation of the United states
of South America—New Grenada, Venezuela
and Ecuador. I hold in my hand a volume
of the Annuaire des Deux Mondes, containing
a general history of the different states
during the years 1853 and 1854. I will not
occupy the time of the House by entering
into the details of that history ; I shall epitomize it by reading a few lines from
the table
of contents, in which we find mention made
of the principal events in the most succinct
form. I read from this table as follows:—
" Venezuela—General condition of Venezuela—Insurrection of 1853—Insurrection
of 1854." One per annum, one would
soon
become used to insurrections and think but
little of them in that happy country. " Compulsory Loans "—I suppose one may get used
to these operations in course of time, however
disagreeable they may be. At all events,
if matters turn out well with the compulsory borrowers, as I have no doubt
they do, they do not leave enough to
their compulsory creditors to make it worth
their while to renew the Operation annually, and thus we see that compulsory loans
are not effected every year in Venezuela
with the same regularity in which the
insurrections there are carried out. "New Grenada
—movements of parties;" I augur nothing
good from this movement. " The Golgothas
and Draconians"—probably the liberals and
conservatives, who have had the singular
taste to assume these villainous titles and
who discuss the question of the day by
musketry practice—" struggles of parties and
threats of military revolution ; movement of
17th April." Still another movement—
"uprising of the Provinces ;"—here, at all
events, we have an unmistakable movement,
as to the nature of which there can be no
doubt whatever. " Present state of the
civil war."—In New Grenada civil war figures
in the quotations just as in Canada ; we
quote transactions in flour or lumber ; it is
their normal condition. I hear an honorable
member exclaim " Oh, but they are savages!"
They are not savages ; but I am free to confess they behave like savages. This is
but
the ordinary effect of civil war ; as witness
what is passing amongst our neighbors in
the United States. But let us proceed to
another confederation. Bolivia and Lower
Peru formed themselves into a Confederacy
in 1836. This Confederacy was born and
lived and died, the whole in three years,
between 1836 and 1839, hardly allowing
time to begin to write its history. Next we
have the confederation of the United Provinces of Rio de la Plata or Argentine Republic,
established in 1816, by the union of
fourteen independent provinces. BOUILLET,
after having referred to the promulgation of
the new Constitution, continues in the following terms:-
This Constitution, however, does not
prevent
the united provinces of Rio de la Plata from
being a prey to anarchy. The federalists and the
anti-federalists are continually at war. Manufactures there are none ; and the trade
is very limited.
In that same table of contents of the Annuaire des Deux Mondes, I read * * *
"Civil
war and raising of the siege of Buenos Ayresseparate Constitution for Buenos Ayres
* * *
—Struggle between the parties, and financial
distress—Disturbance (echauffourée) of the
18th July 1853." I suppose this word means
something half-way between a movement and
an insurrection, " Revolution of the 25th September." Events succeed each other rapidly.
" Civil war—Intervention of Brazil."
But all this passed in 1853 and 1854. It is
ancient history. Let us look at a few journals of last week or the week before. What
do we find? Here is a specimen or two :
"The President of San Salvador in his
speech at the opening of the House defends
349
himself indignantly against the
imputation
of a wish to annex Central America to
Mexico ;" or take another article:
" Hostilities have recommenced between the Empire
of Brazil and the Republic of Uruguay," one
of the States of the Argentine Confederation. " Paraguay, an ally of Uruguay, has
also
declared war against Brazil. The latter is
assisted by the revolutionary party
in Uraguay, under the orders of General Flores. A
Brazilian fleet assisted by General Flores and
the revolutionists of Uraguay, has burned
Paysandu, the capital of Uruguay * * * so
that Uruguay is torn at the same time by civil
war and a foreign war." This is a lamentable state of affairs ! How prudently ministers
have acted in omitting all mention of
these sad scenes, in asking us to vote for
Confederation ! They would have spoiled
their brilliant picture by too great a depth
of shadow. Passy, in his MĂ©moire sur les
formes de Gouvernement et les causes qui les
déterminent, (Mémoires de l'Institut, Sciences
morales et politiques, 2e série, vol. 3,) expresses himself as follows, speaking of all
these South American Confederations:
Seldom does a year pass, without fresh
rebellions breaking out among them ; very seldom do
the heads of the governments reach the legal term
of their functions. The presidentships are ephemeral dictatorships, the prize of generals
who,
exiles one day, are at the head of
armies the next,
while the states themselves sometimes confederate, again independent, are constantly
changing
their forms of government and their aspect.
PASSY assigns two main causes for these
occurrences. The absence of homogeneity
or common origin, and the want of knowledge. As to this want of knowledge, I must
observe that there are few nations
in the
world, if any, the population of which is
generally as enlightened as that of the
United
States of
North America, and yet, at this
very time, we see the dogs of civil
war let
loose among them and raging as fiercely as
ever they did among the confederate governments of South America. As to the
absence of homogeneity talked of by PASSY,
if it exists to such an extent as to lead
to these sad results among the confederetions of South America, in which all the
citizens are, without exception, Catholics,
speaking the same language, and who all
within a few years fought side by side against
their common enemy, Spain, to achieve
their liberty,—if they are deficient, I say,
in homogeneity, what is the case with us?
Protestants and Catholics, French, English
and Irish speaking two different
languages.
The strongest bond of union among the
citizens of a state is a community of language
and religion. We have neither in common.
The confederations of South America have
both, and yet, as PASSY says, they have not
sufficient homogeneity to afford a hope
that
they can ever live in peace under a federal
régime. Mexico was constituted a Confederation in 1824. In 1837 it was united, and
the union subsisted till 1846, except three
years of dictatorship. In 1846 the Federal
principle again prevailed, but disappeared
in 1853, since which period the history of
Mexico is too generally known to need repetition in this place. It is written with
the blood of its citizens. I shall merely
mention the United States of North America.
I do not pretend—I do not possess the ability
—to trace out the real sources of the immense civil war by which they are now rent
in pieces. Enough for me to say, that nobody is to consider slavery as the only cause
of the civil strife.
More than thirty years
ago upon a question of tariff which went to
protect the manufacturers of the North at the
expense of the planters of the South, South
Carolina sounded the signal of insurrection,
as she since did in 1861 ; and had it not been
for the firmness of General JACKSON, who
overstepped his powers to save his country,
the civil contest would have commenced at
that time. It was sure to come on ; it was
only delayed for a while. These were all
trials of the Confederate system.
MR. CORNELLIER—All the confederations which you have mentioned were or
are republican, and had the common fate of
republican institutions. You have not said
a word about monarchical confederations.
MR. JOLY —I have made no mention of
monarchical confederations, because none
have ever existed, and none can exist. The
principle of a monarchy is that the war
resides in one person; the principle of confederation is that it resides in all the
members of the confederation. A confederation
would, therefore, always be a republic, even
if formed of several states subject to a monarchy ; because the power would not be
vested in one person, but in each of the
several states, of which no one would
acknowledge a head ; it would be a republic
consisting of a very small number of members. Before I take leave of all the confederations,
the names of which I have mentioned, I intend to say one word, at least, in
their favor. We understand that states
350
perfectly independent of one another, and
not subject to any authority bearing equally
on them all, may have agreed (notwithstanding the inconveniences of confederation)
to
become confederate for the purpose of
strengthening themselves to resist a common
enemy. So much they may have done.
But we do not understand how provinces like
ours, which have no existence independent
of each other, but are all subject to the same
authority, need have recourse to confederation for the purpose of cementing a union
which already exists. Confederation, by
marking more strongly the lines of demarcation between them, spoken of by Lord
BROUGHAM, renders any more intimate connection between them for the future impossible.
We are like bars of iron strongly
welded together, which men should try to
unite more strongly to each other by tearing
them asunder to reunite them with shoemaker's paste. Some will answer, " True !
the Federal principle has always and in every
case proved a failure, but the cause lay in
the weakness of the central power. We
shall obviate that inconvenience, by establishing a central power strong enough to
preserve our Confederation from that danger."
But then it will be no longer a Confederation ; it will be a legislative union—a union
which the most zealous advocates of Confederation reject as incompatible with the
various interests of the different provinces.
If you succeed in establishing this central
power, with strength enough to bear sway
over the local powers, the latter will no
longer have an exclusive existence ; they
will become the authorized delegates of the
central power, their officers and every vestige
of confederation will disappear from your
Constitution. If you absolutely resolve to
adopt the Federal principle, you cannot do
it without adopting at the same time all its
inconveniences. The weakness of the
central power is not the fruit of the Federal
system ; it is its root, it is itself. This is
the reason why states which are perfectly
independent of each other, adopt the Federal
principle solely as a means of defence against
foreigners, because the central power in a
confederation cannot be other than weak.
We already possess, under our present Constitution, and without confederation, a central
power stronger than any power which you
can create, and to which we submit without
complaint, because it is perfectly compatible
with the existence of our local powers—I
mean the power of England. It is exercised
by men who live too far from us to hearken
to the bickerings of race or of party, or to be
mixed up with them in any way. But if
that central power was wielded by men taken
from among ourselves, men who have taken
part in our quarrels and animosities, and who
would make use of it to give effect to the
views of their party, it would become insupportable. As it now exists, we feel it
only by the benefits it confers. Having
thus shown the serious inconveniences
innate in the Federal system, let us see
whether there be anything exceptional in our
position, operating in our favor, and allowing as to hope for immunity from those
evils
which have befallen all former confederations.
What is our position? In what respects is
it more favorable than that of other confederations? Let us begin with Lower Canada
;
its population is composed of about three-
fourths
French-Canadians, and of one-fourth
English-Canadians. It is impossible, even
for the blindest admirers of the scheme of
Confederation, to shut out from their view
this great difference of nationality, which is
certainly fated to play an important part in
the destinies of the future Confederation.
When Lord DURHAM wrote his celebrated
report in 1839, he said, when speaking of
the English-Canadians of Lower Canada:—
" The English population will never submit
to the authority of a parliament in which
the French have a majority, or even the
semblance of a majority." A little further
on, he added :—" In the significant language
of one of their most eminent men, they assert
that Lower Canada must become English,
even if to effect that object it should be
necessary that the province should cease to
belong to England." Whatever errors Lord
DURHAM may have fallen into in judging
the French-Canadians, he certainly cannot
be reproached with having shewn too great
severity towards the English- Canadians. He
merely depicted their sentiments, as they
manifested themselves in his day. Since
then, things have undergone a change.
And last autumn, at Sherbrooke, the Honorable Minister of Finance presented to us
a
very different picture, when he said :—" For
five and twenty years harmony has reigned
in Lower Canada, and the English and
French populations have entered into a compact to labor together to promote the common
interests of the country." This picture is
a true one at the present time, as was also
351
that drawn by Lord DURHAM in his day ;
things have changed ! In the Parliament of
the United Canadas, the English are in a
majority ; they have not to deal with a
French majority. But, if circumstances
have altered, men have not ; place them in
the same position in which they were previous to 1839, and again you will perceive
in them the same sentiments as were depicted
by Lord DURHAM. The seed lies hid in the
soil, it does not shew itself on the surface ;
but a few drops of rain are all that is necessary to cause it to spring up. If such
sentiments did not exist between the two nationalities, why this resolution, to be
submitted
to the House by the honorable member for
Missisquoi, which I am now about to read:-
Resolved, That assuming the Federal system of
government to be a political necessity in a union
of the British North American Provinces, any
Confederation of those provinces which ignores
the difference of race, language
and religion of
the inhabitants of the respective states or territories
sought to be thus united, and is not framed with
a view to secure to the inhabitants of such state or
territory the management of their own local affairs,
in accordance with their own peculiar views and
sentiments, is unwise and inexpedient, and not
conducive to good government or to the peace
and tranquillity of those for whom it is framed ;
Resolved, That with a view to secure
to that
portion of the inhabitants of Lower Canada
speaking the English language, the free exercise
and enjoyment of their own ideas, institutions
and rights, in any proposed Confederation of the
provinces, Canada should be divided into three
civil divisions, to wit: Western, Central and
Eastern Canada.
At the mere idea of a legislature in which
the French element is to be in a majority in
Lower Canada, the passions described by
Lord DURHAM are evinced. It is true that
the Ministry are doing their best to reassure
both parties, and to each party, separately,
they make promises at the expense of the
other. French-Canadians ! do not allow
yourselves to be led away by those brilliant
promises. An Italian poet describes the
endeavors of a mother to induce her child to
swallow a draught, which is intended to restore him to health ; to tempt him, she
covers
the edge of the cup with honey ; in like manner, the edge of the cup which is presented
to you has been covered with honey, but instead of containing a health-restoring draught,
that cup contains poison and death. I do
not believe that the French-Canadians will
share the power of their majority in Lower
Canada by striving to oppress the English-
Canadian
; but there are
too many points
on which they disagree to allow of their
living long in peace together, in spite of
their sincere wish to do so, under the system of local government which is proposed
to us. The Honorable Prime Minister said
in the Council:-
I believe the French-Canadians will do
all in
their power to render justice to their fellow subjects
of English origin ; and it should not be forgotten
that, if the former are in a majority in Lower
Canada, the English will be in a majority in the
General Government, and that no act of real
injustice can take place without its being reversed
by the Federal Parliament.
But who is to decide whether any act of
the
French-Canadians is really an act of injustice? The Federal Parliament in which
the English element will be all-powerful !
In political matters, a disinterested opinion
is but seldom come to ; the sympathies of
the majority in the Federal Parliament will
be against us ; I see in this the prospect of
a position which may prove to be a most
dangerous one for us; if the strife should
commence, no one can tell when it will end.
DR. BEAUBIEN—I have confidence in
the conscience of the Federal Parliament.
We ought not to attribute evil intentions to
men, but rather suppose that they will treat
us as they desire to be treated themselves,
with justice, and in a conscientious manner.
MR. JOLY—Despite the honorable member's sermon—I beg his pardon, I mean
despite the honorable member's observationI am of opinion that we ought not to leave
interests so precious as those which are confided to us to the mercy of men with whom
we are not always certain of
living on good
terms, without any other
guarantee than
their conscience.
Confederation, by changing
the state of things which
established harmony
between the English and French
races in
Lower Canada, will destroy that
harmony,
and the consequences may be
only too easily
foreseen. In Upper Canada there
is much
more homogeneity, and, by consequence, the
danger of intestine trouble there is much less
great ; true it is, that the enormous power of
the Orangemen and the law respecting separate schools may give rise to difficulties,
but
I fear more for the relations of Upper Canada
with the other provinces, and especially the
Atlantic Provinces. Upper Canada objects,
in general terms, to the construction of the
Intercolonial Railway. Its wish
is to see
the resources of the future Confederation
applied to opening up the immense territory
of the North-West, and to the enlargement
352
of its canals. The Atlantic Provinces
desire
the Intercolonial Railway ; but they hold in
dread the expenditure which would be entailed by the opening up of the North-West
territory and the enlargement of the canals.
Upper Canada already fears lest the Atlantic
Provinces should unite with Lower Canada
against her ; the French-Canadians fear for
their nationality, threatened by the English
majority from the other provinces, and yet
Confederation so far only exists as a scheme.
If our relations with the other provinces are
not at present very intimate, at least there
is nothing hostile in them. We regard them
with interest and friendship as members of
one and the same family with ourselves.
We all grow together under the shelter of
the English flag, and in case of war with the
United States, we are all ready to unite in
our efforts, in good faith, for our
common defence. But when the different provinces
shall meet together in the Federal Parliament
as on a field of battle, when they have there
contracted the habit of contending with each
other to cause their own interests, so various
and so incompatible with each other, to
prevail, and when, from repetition of this
undying strife, jealousy and inevitable hatred
shall have resulted, our sentiments towards
the other provinces will be no longer the
same ; and should any great danger, in
which our safety would depend upon our
united condition, arise, it would then perhaps be found that our Federal union had
been the signal for our disunion. In such
a position the greatest danger would result
from the neighborhood of the United States,
a nation which for a long time has looked on
our provinces with a covetous eye, and
which has an immense army which the end
of the war, probably not far distant, will
leave without occupation. They will follow
up our political struggles closely, will encourage the discontented, and will soon
find
an opportunity for interfering in our internal
affairs, being called in by the
weaker party ;
history is full of similar occurrences. The
Attorney General for Lower Canada pretends
that the opponents of Confederation desire
annexation to the United States. I find it
difficult to believe in his sincerity when he
expresses that opinion ; it is usually by such
arguments as this that he replies to his
opponents when he has no other answer to
make them. One of the most justly respected men in Lower Canada, a man who enjoys
universal esteem, Mr. CHERBIER, who had
long withdrawn from public life,
determined,
despite his repugnance to entering the lists,
to raise his voice in order to warn his fellow-
countrymen against the dangers of the Confederation project. The purity of his motives
could not be questioned ; being connected
with no political party, he was perfectly
disinterested in the course he took. It
appears to me that the opinion of such a
man deserved at least a respectful hearing.
Instead of answering his argument, the
honorable the Attorney General attempted
to make him the laughing stock of this
House. The Government stifles the voice
of those who wish to enlighten the people ;
but it takes upon itself the task of enlightening them. Here is a work "in favor of
Confederation," published in 1865, entitled:
L'Union des Provinces de l'Amérique Britannique
du Nord, par l'Hon. Joseph Cauchon, membre de Parlement Canadien, et
Rêdacteur-en-chef du Journal de Québec ;
and also author of a work published in 1858,
"against Confederation." If the Government were generous, they would distribute
the work of 1858 at the same time with that
of 1865, in order to afford to every one the
advantage of a choice, more particularly as
the honorable author cannot be right in both.
In bringing these two works into contrast,
I do not wish to make a personal attack on
the honorable member ; the fact that he first
wrote against Confederation and then in favor
of it, is perfectly foreign to the debate. I
should not have mentioned the matter, were
it not that the Government make use of
the
work of 1865 (the second) in order to
propagate in every direction their doctrines
on Confederation ; they are distributing
thousands of copies of the work throughout
Lower Canada, and in order to influence the
English-speaking population, they are having
it translated into English. It is, therefore,
right to warn the people that they must
distrust the arguments contained in that
book ; they are diametrically opposed to the
opinions enunciated by the author in his
work of 1858, in which he says, in express
terms, that the consequences of Confederation
would be the ruin of Lower Canada. Of
course the author, in his work of 1865,
attempts to explain his change of opinion ;
it is none the less true that he was wrong
either in 1858 or else in 1865—which ? It
may be said in behalf of the book of 1865
that it is four times thicker than the other ;
this perhaps may seem a disadvantage to the
353
minds of some readers. The Government,
knowing well how much the people fear
direct taxes, tell them that Confederation
involves them in no such risk. What new
method are they going to invent then for
raising money? It is perfectly clear that
Confederation will largely increase our expenditure. Then, for instance, Canada,
which has now but one Government to
maintain (and it is as much as she can do to
maintain it), will have three to maintain, or
nearly so : the Government of Upper Canada, the Government of Lower Canada, and
nine-twelfths of the Federal Government ;
it will be the same as regards the legislatures. Canada, with a population forming
nine-twelfths of the Confederation, will have
to build nine-twelfths of the Intercolonial
Railway, in place of the five-twelfths she
was to have been charged with, under the
arrangements of 1863. With reference to
the opening of the all but boundless territory
of the North-West, and the construction of
the fortifications which are spoken of only
in whispers as yet, lest we should become
alarmed, it is impossible to
calculate the
expenditure these works will involve. And,
in face of this increased expenditure, our
chief source of revenue is to be considerably
diminished. I refer to the import customs
duties. Here is the justification offered by
the Minister of Finance for the reduction:-
It is evident since the Atlantic Provinces consume a far larger quantity of articles
paying
import duties than we do, that we shall be compelled, in order to assimilate all the
customs
tariffs,
to diminish the import duties we pay in
Canada. The Atlantic Provinces cannot adopt a
customs tariff so high as ours.
I think I have shown that our expenditure
must infallibly increase ; and as our revenue
will diminish, to what new tax will the Government have recourse in order to make
up
the deficit ? We are told that Lower Canada
will have a revenue of nearly a million and
a half to meet her local expenditure ; with
what shall we meet our proportion of the
Federal expenditure, which will be far larger ? But I shall now deal with the advantages
which
we are told must certainly result
from Confederation. They may be divided
into three classes—political, military and
commercial. The honorable member for
Montmorency tells us that we are to have
the advantage of a seat at the banquet
of nations. The perspective is a highly
flattering one, I admit, but we must be
permitted to take a common-sense view
of it. The Honorable Minister of Finance, faithful to the doctrine that the greatness
of a State is proportioned to the greatness of its debt, announces to us that our
credit will be considerably increased, and
that we shall be enabled to borrow much
more extensively than we have hitherto done,
a prospect at which he seems greatly to rejoice. This facility of borrowing is not
always an unmixed good ; but it must be
remembered that our credit will depend entirely on the success of our Confederation.
If it should not succeed, if any serious difficulty should arise within it—a thing
which
is possible—public opinion will be more
prompt to take alarm, in that our Federal
form of government does not afford strong
guarantees for the maintenance of order and
peace, and our credit will soon be worth
less than the credit of a single province is
worth to-day. The Honorable the President
of the Council enumerated all our provinces,
comparing one after another, as regards superficial extent, with the great states
of Europe. He finished with the Hudson's Bay
territory, stating that it is as large as European Russia ; but will it ever be capable
of
supporting, like European Russia, a population of sixty millions, and feeding, with
its
surplus corn, a great part of Europe ? The
vastness of territory in which the honorable
minister takes so much pride is precisely what
inspires me with uneasiness ; we shall have
the outward form of a giant, with the strength
of a child ; we shall be unable to stand up.
Hasty and premature growth is as fatal to
states as it is to men ; a state should extend
its limits only in proportion as its strength increases. The Roman Empire did not
attain
in a day its colossal proportions ; its growth,
like that of the oak, was slow but sure. Let
us not allow ourselves to be dazzled by the
ambition of becoming all at once a great
people ; the United States are a great people,
but
where is the people, however small it
maybe, that now envies their greatness ? Let
us be content with our lot ; few nations have
a better one. The territorial formation of
the future Federation will also be an insurmountable obstacle to the establishment
of a
strong government ; it amounts to a deformity. I give the following passage in support
of this proposition:-
What may the geographical advantages of the
Union be ? We speak more as regards the future
than as regards the present. If the provinces it
354
is proposed to unite were grouped in a
compact
mass as are the majority of the states of the American Union, if their geographical
position were
such that they needed one another in
order to
prosper, in order to attain an outlet on the sea,
we should say—here, at all events, is a motive for
the sacrifices demanded of us. But no, they are
scattered over the surface of the Gulf. The
nearest to Canada, New Brunswick, is connected
with us solely by a narrow strip of territory at
most but a few leagues in width, and bordered
throughout by the menacing frontier of the American Union. And even at this moment,
pending
the carrying out of the works of improvement we
have just referred to, the shortest route from the
provinces
to Canada is by way of the United
States. While the union of the Canadas was
odious in its formula, it was at all events justifiable in a geographical point of
view ; Upper
Canada required the use of the St. Lawrence in
order to reach the sea, and the two provinces
together form a compact body, a fact which is the
strongest possible condemnation of the Constitutional Act of 1791, and on which they
were separated.
If the readers of the work published by
the Hon. Mr. CAUCHON, in 1865, in favor of
Confederation, desire to know where I found
that passage, I answer, in the work published by the Hon. Mr. CAUCHON, in 1858.
It is probably the portion of the honorable
gentleman's work of 1858, which he will find
it most difficult
to get over. He may, indeed,
allege in explanation of his change of opinion
on other points, that the political position is
altered, that our relations with the provinces
and our neighbors of the United States are no
longer the same; but I apprehend he will hardly go the length of asserting that the
geographical configuration of the country is changed.
He will perhaps endeavor to show that the
Intercolonial Railway, the construction of
which forms part of the plan of Confederation, will obviate the defects of our geographical
position ; but I would remind him that
in 1858, when he wrote his first work, the
building of the Intercolonial Railway was
proposed as it is proposed now ; this will appear from the passage I have just quoted:
" And at this moment, pending the carrying
out of the improvements we have just referred to, the shortest way to come from the
provinces to us is by way of the
United
tates." Mr. SPEAKER, with the best possible desire to assist the honorable gentleman,
I find it utterly impossible to extricate him
from his unfortunate position, and I shall not
make the attempt. The Hon. Attorney General promises us that Lower Canada will be
the sun of the Confederation. Since we cannot find a comparison on this poor earth
emblematic of our future greatness, let us
borrow one from the heavens at the risk of losing
ourselves in the clouds with the advocates of
Confederation ; I propose the adoption of the
rainbow as our emblem. By the endless
variety of its tints the rainbow will give an excellent idea of the diversity of races,
religions,
sentiments and interests of the different parts
of the Confederation. By its slender and
elongated form, the rainbow would afford a
perfect representation of the geographical configuration of the Confederation. By
its lack
of consistence—an image without substance
—the rainbow would represent aptly the solidity of our Confederation. An emblem we
must have, for every great empire has one ;
let us adopt the rainbow. Mr. SPEAKER, the
fact of our provinces being all at once erected
into a Confederation will not give us a single
additional man ; battalions cannot be made
to spring forth from the earth, armed from
head to foot, by a stamp of the foot as in the
mythological ages. The Hon. Attorney General for Lower Canada has developed a plan
of strategy which I take the liberty of seriously recommending to the Commander-in-
Chief. The honorable gentleman sums up in
the following terms the advantages of the
Confederation in a military point of view :
"When we shall be united, the enemy will
know that if he attacks any part of our provinces, the Island of Prince Edward or
Canada, he
will have to meet the combined forces of the
Empire." There was no need of the Confederation to convince our neighbors of that
;
they are, as a general rule, sufficiently sharp-
witted to discover, without being told it, that
if they content themselves with attacking us
at a single point at a time, of course they will
have to meet all our strength. Would it not
be well to enter into a contract, binding them
to attack us at a single point only at one time
—say Quebec? We might, in fact, give them
the free use of the Grand Trunk Railway to
bring their troops to Point Levis. Of what
benefit to the United States would be their
vast armies, their great fleets, their abundant
means of transport in every direction, if they
were to attack us only at one point at a time,
as the Hon. Attorney General seems to hope ?
In the war of 1812, they attacked us simultaneously at different points, though their
troops were far less numerous in proportion
to ours than they would now be in case of
war, and though their means of transport
were then far inferior to what they now are.
Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island,
Nova
Scotia, New Brunswick and Canada, would
355
be attacked simultaneousy, and each province
at different points. The provinces will help
one another sufficiently if each of them can
maintain the integrity of its own territory,
so that the enemy may not be enabled to take
the adjoining province in flank ; in the same
way that a soldier in line of battle assists his
comrade at his side by simply keeping his
own place in the ranks. We do not need
Confederation to give us that unity which
is indispensable in all military operationsunity of headship. A commander-in-chief
will direct the defence of all our provinces ;
he will forward troops, and, if he can, vessels
of war, to the points most seriously threatened, and will assist each province to
defend the post which Providence has already assigned to each in our long line of
battle. Moreover, in the event of
war with
the United States, if we were to trust to numbers we should be sadly disappointed.
What
we need above all is enthusiasm ; our citizen
soldiers must be convinced that they are risking their lives for something worth while
;
that they are happier in being under the flag
of England than they could be under that of
the United States, and that they must lose by
an exchange. In the present position of the
United States it is not difficult to make them
understand that ; the taxes alone with which
the Americans are now crushed down, and of
which the vast volume is growing from day
to day, suffice to shew, at a first glance, how
far our position is superior to theirs in a material point of view. But if, in order
to meet
the extravagant expenditure the Confederation must bring with it, the people find
themselves taxed beyond their resources, the Government need not be surprised, if
they should
ever appeal to the courage of the people and
call upon them to meet the enemy, to receive
the answer the old man got from his donkey
in LAFONTAINE'S fable. When, at the
approach of the enemy, the old man wished to
mount and fly, the donkey refused to bear
him, and commenced the following dialogue
with his master:-
Me
fera-t-on porter double bât, double charge ?Â
Non pas, dit le vieillard, qui prit
d'abord le large.
Et que m'importe donc, dit l'âne,
Ă
qui je sois ?
Sanves-vous, et me laisses paltre.
Notre ennemi, c'est notre
maĂ®tre,Â
Je vous le dis en bon françois.
*
* " On
me double burthen do you think they
will lay ?"
"Not so," said the old man, ere he
toddled away.
" Then, what odds," cried the
donkey, " to whom I
belong ?
You may take to your heels and leave me to
feed.
The donkey's real enemy is his own master's greed,
And I trust you'll admit that the argument's strong."
LAFONTAINE, it will be seen, found means,
two
hundred years ago, of saying serious things in
a laughing way. If the Government treat
the people as a beast of burthen, to be pitilessly overladen, the people will one
day make
them the same answer that the donkey made
to his master, in LAFONTAINE'S fable.
Lord
BACON, in his essays, expresses the
same
thought in more serious terms. But apart
from purely material interests, which are
nevertheless highly important, for happiness
and poverty rarely go hand in hand, there are
other interests of a higher order which rouse
the courage of a people and sometimes render
it capable of sustaining the most unequal
struggles. Deprive the French Canadians of
their nationality, and you deprive them of the
enthusiasm which would have doubled their
strength. I concur with the Government in
their desire to form more intimate commercial
relations between the different provinces ; but
when it is attempted to use the immense advantages which would result from these relations
as an overwhelming argument in favor
of Confederation, it is as well to form a proper
appreciation of those advantages, and see
whether we cannot secure them without Confederation. The Gulf Provinces possess timber,
coal and fisheries ; our own two great
articles of export are timber and wheat.
With regard to timber, the Gulf Provinces have no more need of ours than we
of theirs. As to coal we import from England what we need for our present wants, in
ballast, on board the numerous ships which
come here for our timber, and we thus get it
cheaper than we could import it from the
Gulf Provinces. When this supply becomes
insufficient to meet our growing wants, it will
be necessary to look somewhere for a supply
of coal. If the Lower Provinces can furnish
it to us at cheaper rates than we can get
it in
the United States, we shall buy it from them.
Upper Canada will probably get its coal from
the Pennsylvania mines, which are in direct
communication with Lake Erie, on the north
shore of which the richest and most thickly
settled portion of Upper Canada is
situated.
As regards fisheries, Canada has a stock of
fish in its waters sufficient not only to supply
all its own requirements, but to enable it to
export largely from Gaspé to Europe. Now
as to wheat. The Honorable President of the
Council told us that in a single year the Atlantic Provinces paid $4,440,000 to the
United States for flour, and that a portion of that
flour came from Upper Canada ; and the honorable gentleman asks why should not we
356
ourselves sell our flour to the Lower
Provinces ? For the simple reason that, instead of
having to pay four millions four hundred and
forty-seven thousand dollars to the United
States, they would have to pay us five millions
of dollars, and they would therefore refuse to
buy from us. There is no such thing as sentiment in matters of business ; men buy
in the
cheapest market. The Gulf Provinces will
buy their flour from the United States so long
as they can obtain it at a lower price there
than in Canada ; and the fact that they do
obtain it cheaper from the United States is
clearly demonstrated by their buying from
the Americans and not from us. But a single
glance at the map will account for the difference in price. I do not believe that
the Intercolonial Railway can be advantageously
employed for the transport of flour from Rivière
du Loup to Halifax ; the cost of transport
over five hundred miles of railway would be
too great ; the water route must therefore be
adopted. Kingston and Halifax are in the
same latitude, between the 44th and 45th
parallel. From Kingston the St. Lawrence
flows undeviatingly towards the north-east,
and falls into the Gulf in the 50th
degree of
north latitude. From that point, in order to
reach the Gut of Canso, you must not only
make five degrees of southing, but also make
nearly three degrees of longitude to the east,
and then nearly three more towards the west
before reaching Halifax. Moreover, the navigation is more or less dangerous throughout.
When you compare this circuitous
route with
the far more direct one of the United States,
it is quite easy to understand why the United
States can sell even our wheat to the Gulf
Provinces at lower prices than we ourselves
are able to do. I have attempted to reduce
the commercial advantages we are promised to
their proper proportion. I will now endeavor
to show that we can secure every one of these
advantages without the Confederation. I
shall cite, for that purpose, the very words of
the Honorable Minister of Finance:-
If we look at the results of the free
interchange
of produce between Canada and the United States,
we shall find that our trade with them increased,
in ten years, from less than two millions to twenty
millions of dollars. If free trade has produced
such results in that case, what may we not expect
when the artificial obstacles which hamper free
trade between us and the provinces of the Gulf
shall have disappeared ?
But this fine result was not obtained by
means of a Confederation with the United
States. What hinders us from having free
trade with the Gulf Provinces ? In support
of this view, I shall note the work of the
honorable member for Montmorency, not
that
of 1858, but that of 1865, written in favor of
Confederation, pages 32 and 33, where he
shews in the most conclusive manner that we
have no need of Confederation to improve our
commercial relations with the Gulf Provinces.
It is under this head of commercial advantages that the Intercolonial Railway fitly
comes in. The Honorable President of the
Council tells us that he is favorable to Confederation, because it will give us a
seaport at
all seasons of the year—a most powerful
argument, he adds, in its favor. We stand
in great need of a seaport in the winter
season, more especially if the United States
abolish the right of transit. Absolutely,
without reference to that, we require it in
order to perfect our system of defence. But is
Confederation necessary in order that we may
build the Intercolonial Railway? Certainly
not. The hon. minister, in the same speech,
gives an answer to the representatives from
Upper Canada complaining that the
Intercolonial Railway is to be built before any scheme
is entertained for opening up the North-West
Territory,—" The reason is that the necessary means of constructing the Intercolonial
Railway are already secured to us by the
guarantee of the Imperial Government, which
will enable us to obtain money at a very advantageous rate of interest." These means
were secured to us a long time since, long
before the question of Confederation was
agitated. I see also in a report laid before the
House in a return to an address moved for
last year by the Honorable Minister of Agriculture, that as soon as it became known
in
England that Mr. FLEMING had been appointed to report upon a plan for the Intercolonial
Railway, two offers were at once made
for the building of it, uncalled for by us.
One is contained in Mr. C. D. ARCHIBALD'S
letter of 27th August, 1863, and the other
in that of Mr. C. J. BRYDGES of 4th March,
1864. Our credit is good enough to procure
us the means of building the railway without having recourse to Confederation. To
sum up all in few words : all the advantages
are negative, that is to say, Confederation will
do no harm to our interests, military or commercial, but neither do they require it.
As to
the inconveniences of which it may be productive, I leave them to the judgment of
the
House, who will decide whether they are positive. I am asked : " If you will have
nothing to
do with Confederation, what will you have ?"
357
I answer, we would remain as we are.
That, I
am told, is impossible, in our present position
with respect to Upper Canada. The Hon.
Premier, in introducing the scheme of
Confederation to the Legislature, said,—" At the
time these measures were resolved upon, the
country was bordering on civil strife, and he
would ask if it was not the duty of both sides
to do all they could to prevent the unfortunate
results which would have followed." All the
ministers following him, used expressions of
the same tenor, nothing caring for the incalculable wrong which they were doing to
the
country, they whose duty it was to watch for
the preservation of its good name, and the
safety of its interests. How will the world be
astonished, who look upon Canada as one of
the most favored countries on earth, in which
the people enjoy more liberty and more perfect
tranquillity than is to be found in any other
—how will they be astonished to hear that we
are " a country bordering on civil strife ?"
How will such tidings affect our credit ? The
world will not understand the motives of our
ministers in painting the condition of our
country in such gloomy colors. It will
not be aware that they must have Confederation to keep their places, and that this
threat
of war is uttered for the nonce as an unanswerable argument to force us to accept
it. What
a discrepancy there is between this declaration
of the Ministry that we are "bordering
on
civil strife," and the opening of the Speech
from the Throne, which expresses " thankfulness to a beneficent Providence for the
general contentment of the people of this province," or the address voted by the Legislature
in answer to the Speech from the Throne
which is the faithful echo of this grateful
sentiment
! What would the members of the
Ministry have said if a member had risen to
move an amendment to the Address in the
words made use of by the Hon. Premier,
" That the country is bordering on civil
strife, and that therefore the House cannot admit that there is general contentment
among the people ?" It is on reasons widely
differing from these that the Speech
from the
Throne takes ground in recommending the
adoption of the scheme of Confederation.
But are we really bordering on civil strife ?
Of course it is representation based on population which is the exciting cause. Do
the
people of Upper Canada demand representation based on population as a condition sine
quâ non of the continuation of our
peaceful
relations with them ? Has this desire to obtain representation based on population
taken
such deep root in the bosom of Upper
Canada,
that it is ready to plunge us and itself into
the horrors of civil war in order to achieve
it ? Or is not representation by population
rather one of those political clap-traps which
ambitious men, who can catch them no other
way, set to catch the heedless multitude ?
We, Lower Canadians, who at this distance
cannot judge of the sentiments of Upper
Canadians by our own observation, must depend for the formation of our opinions respecting
them on the Upper Canada newspapers, and on the speeches of their members
in this House. They are the only sources of
information which we possess. Well, in 1862,
we saw the Upper Canada leaders, except the
President of the Council, who was wise enough
to keep aloof, who are at the same time connected with the principal newspapers there,
either as proprietors, editors or co-editors, accept office under the MACDONALD-SICOTTE
Government, the fundamental principle of
which was equal representation of the two
sections, a principle which entitled it to the
cordial support of Lower Canada. These
gentlemen we saw reelected, notwithstanding
their abandonment of their principles, and we
found them voting against representation by
population. From this I conclude that Upper Canada is much more indifferent, and its
leaders much less sincere touching this question of the representation, than they
would
have us believe. Were it otherwise, Upper
Canada would have taken the opportunity,
afforded by the election, of
punishing the men
who had betrayed her. But who are those two
men who now pitch their voices in harmony
(formerly so discordant to predict civil war,
if we do not vote for Confederation ? They
are the Attorney General for Lower Canada,
and the President of the Council (Hon. Messrs.
CARTIER and BROWN !)—the one demanding
representation by population, the other refusing it : both took their stand as the
champions
of their sections, and became their chieftains
respectively. When they found out that that
game was unprofitable to both, as
the Presiident of the Council seemed to be excluded
for
ever from the ministerial benches, and the
Attorney General could not maintain himself
in his position on them, the Attorney General
gave way : he agreed to representation by
population, trying to disguise it under the
name of Confederation ; and to reward him
for this complaisance, the President of the
Council saved him—him and his colleaguesand condescended to take a seat among them.
They hold over us a threat of civil war to
358
force us to ratify their bargain. There
is
only one man in Canada who could have done
what the Attorney General for Lower Canada
has done, and that man is himself. Thanks
to his energy, to his intimate acquaintance
with the strong and the weak points of his
fellow-countrymen, the Attorney General for
Lower Canada has succeeded in attaining an
elevation which no one can dispute with him
—that of chief of the French Canadian nationality. To attain this eminence, he has
crushed the weak, cajoled the strong, deceived
the credulous, bought up the venal, and exalted the ambitious ; by turns he has called
in
the accents of religion and stimulated the
clamour of interest—he has gained his end.
When Lower Canada heard of his alliance
with the President of the Council, there arose
from all quarters one universal cry of indignation. He managed to convert the cry
of
anger into a shout of admiration. When his
scheme of Confederation became public, a
feeling of uneasiness pervaded all minds ;
that instinct forewarned them of the danger
which impended. He has hushed that feeling to a sleep of profound security. I shall
compare him to a man who has gained the
unbounded confidence of the public, who takes
advantage of it to set up a Savings Bank, in
which the rich man deposits his wealth, and
the day laborer the small amount which he
has squeezed out of his wages, against a day
of need—both without a voucher. When that
man has gathered all into his strong box, he
finds an opportunity to purchase, at the cost
of all he holds in trust, the article on which
he has long set his ambitious eye ; and he buys
it, unhesitatingly, without a thought of the
wretches who are doomed to ruin by his conduct. The deposit committed to the keeping
of the Attorney General is the fortune of the
French-Canadians—their nationality. That
fortune had not been made in a day ; it was
the accumulation of the toil and the savings
of a whole people in a whole century. To
prolong the ephemeral existence of his administration for a few months, the Attorney
General has sacrificed, without a scruple, this
precious trust, which the unbounded confidence of his fellow-countrymen had confided
to his keeping.
MR. JOLY—A salary of five thousand dollars annum, and the honor of the position.
MR. JOLY—I am well aware of it ; that
is why the honorable member is desirous
of
extending the circle of his operations. But
he will not long enjoy the fruits of his treason ; by crushing the power of the French-
Canadians he has crushed his own, for upon
them his existence depends. Does he believe
in the sincerity of the friendship of the Liberals of Upper Canada ? They fought with
him
for too long a time to allow of the existence
of any sympathy between them and him, and
now he has lost even their respect. They
consented to ally themselves with him in
order to obtain their object—representation
by population ; but when they no longer
stand in need of him, they will throw him
aside like a worn-out tool. I look upon this
threat of civil war as resembling a farce
played by two comrades ; they shout out to
us, "Take care, we are going to fight; we
shall do some mischief if you don't hold us."
Do not put yourselves out of the way to stop
them ; you need not be alarmed, they will not
fight. It is also said to us, "See how many
changes of Ministry there have been since
1862 ; can such a state of affairs continue
any longer ?" I am free to admit that all those
changes must have been very unpleasant for
the different ministers who have succumbed
under them, but has the country suffered
much by them ? The condition of the finances
of a nation is the touchstone of its prosperity.
In 1862, the Minister of Finance, before resigning, declared a deficit of five millions
one
hundred and fifty-two thousand dollars (page
20 of his speech) ; for the year ending the 30th
June last, there was a surplus of seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars. If all
these
changes of ministries had not taken place, it
is impossible to say how large the deficit
would have become by this time, as for several years previous to 1862 it had gone
on
steadily increasing. These two reasons advanced by ministers are merely intended as
a veil to conceal the true motive for this complete revolution in our Constitution
; that
true motive is simply a desire on their parts
to remain in power. Without wishing to
enter into all the details of the measure proposed to the House, which have been so
ably
handled by the honorable member for Hochelaga, more especially those relating to the
Legislative Council, there are some which I
cannot pass over in silence. The following
are the paragraphs of the resolutions of the
Quebec Conference which regulate the organization of the Lower House of the Federal
Legislature, principally in respect of the number of representatives:-
359
17. The basis of representation in the
House
of Commons shall be population, as determined
by the official census every ten years, and the
number of members at first shall be 194, distributed as follows :
| Upper Canada |
.................. |
82 |
| Lower
Canada |
.................. |
65 |
| Nova Scotia |
.................... |
19 |
| New Brunswick |
................. |
15 |
| Newfoundland |
................. |
8 |
| Prince Edward Island |
............ |
5 |
18. Until the official census of 1871 has
been
made up, there shall be no change in the number
of representatives from the several sections.
19. Immediately after the completion of
the
census of 1871, and immediately after every
decennial census thereafter, the representation
from each section in the House of Commons
shall be readjusted on the basis of population.
20. For purpose of such readjustments,
Lower
Canada shall always be assigned sixty-five
members, and each of the other sections shall at
each readjustment receive, for the ten years then
next succeeding the number of members to which
it will be entitled on the same ratio of representation to population as Lower Canada
will enjoy
according to the census last taken by having
sixty-five members.
21. No reduction shall be made in the
number
of members returned by any section, unless its
population shall have decreased, relatively to the
population of the whole Union, to the
extent of
five per centum.
22. In computing at each decennial period
the
number of members to which each section is entitled, no fractional parts shall be
considered,
unless when exceeding one-half the number entitling to a member, in which case a member
shall be given for each such fractional part.
I object to the 21st clause, because it
contains
provisions which are unjust to Lower Canada.
The full scope of that clause is not generally
understood ; that proportion of five per cent.
appears to be a very small affair, and yet,
under certain circumstances, it might produce
considerable results, which are not
taken into
consideration in the explanations given on
that
subject in the work written by the Honorable
Mr. CAUCHON, which the Government has
caused to be distributed (pages 72 to 87).
It is difficult to foretell what the exact numerical increase of the several provinces
will be
from the present time to the next census in
1871. The Honorable Mr. CAUCHON assumes,
as the basis of his calculations, a rate of thirty
per cent. Let us suppose the case to prove
that in all the provinces (with the
exception
of Lower Canada) the population increases
by thirty per cent between 1861 and 1871,
and that that of Lower Canada increases by
thirty-four per cent. It may, perhaps, be
objected to this that it is improbable. My
reply is, that when we are discussing a scheme
of such importance as that which is now
under
our consideration, we should provide for all
possible contingencies ; but this one is far
from being impossible if the predictions of the
Minister of Finance and the Attorney General,
who promise to Lower Canada so brilliant a
future under the Federal system, are fulfilled.
If Lower Canada becomes the heart of the
commercial life of the Confederation ; if the
mines of copper, lead, silver, and gold which
we have lately discovered should produce the
same results that they produce everywhere
else, that of attracting a great influx of population, I cannot be accused of any
very great
exaggeration in supposing that the population
of Lower Canada may, between the years 1861
and 1871, increase by four per cent more
than the population of the other provinccs.
In the case which I have supposed the increase would be as follows:-
| Upper Canada |
..................... |
418,827 |
| Lower Canada |
....................... |
377,625 |
| Nova Scotia |
...................... |
99,257 |
| New Brunswick |
................... |
75,614 |
| Newfoundland |
........................... |
39,000 |
| Prince Edward Island |
.................. |
24,227 |
| Total increase |
................ |
1,034,550 |
According to this calculation, Lower
Canada
would have, in 1871, a population of 1,488,289 souls, which would have to be divided
by
65, that being the invariable number of representatives assigned to Lower Canada,
in order
to ascertain what will be the number of constituents for each representative in the
Federal Parliament ; the result will be found to
be 22,896. Upper Canada would have a
population of 1,814,918 souls, which,
divided
by 22,896, would give her seventy-nine
representatives instead of eighty-two. Nova Scotia
would have a population of 430,114 souls,
which would give her nineteen representatives
as at present (eighteen and a fraction over the
half). New Brunswick would have a population of 327,661 souls, which would give her
fourteen representatives instead of fifteen.
Newfoundland would have a population of
169,000 souls, which would give her seven
representatives instead of eight. Prince Edward Island would have a population of
104,984 souls, which would give her five
members as at present (four and a fraction
over the half). It will be seen that if the
five other provinces were represented on the
same scale as Lower Canada, they would, in
1871, lose among them five members ; but as
the total population of each will not have
decreased by five per cent, relatively to the
total population of the Confederated Provinces,
360
there will be no reduction in the number
of
their representatives, in accordance with the
provisions of this 21st clause. It is the
interest of Lower Canada, more than of any
other province, to watch with a jealous eye
over the mechanism adopted for the organization of the Federal Legislature. In case
of a
vital question arising, we should have to counteract the votes of these five members
(who
ought, in justice, to be deducted from the
representation of the other provinces) by those
of five of our members, whose votes would
thus be lost to us, as would also be the weight
which their five united counties, with a total
population of 114,480 (or 22,896 for each
county), would throw into the scale. Other
combinations of circumstances might arise
which might prove even more disadvantageous
to us. This subject naturally leads me to
address myself to my French Canadian colleagues ; I fear that my remarks may not be
well received by all, but I hope that honorable
members will be good enough to excuse my
frankness in consideration of the great importance of the question. I have no right
to
maintain that all those who are favorably disposed towards Confederation are not acting
in
good faith ; it is not my wish to reproach
them for acting according to their convictions,
but in so acting they should not forget the
duties which their charge imposes on them.
It a well known fact that when the scheme
of Confederation was laid before the public, all the newspapers, and most of the
members who support the Administration,
declared themselves in favor of the scheme,
but, in nearly every instance, with an express reservation of the right to introduce
certain amendments which they considered
indispensable. But the Honorable Attorney General for Upper Canada declared,
some days ago, that the Government would
accept no amendment, and that the resolutions must be adopted exactly in the shape
in
which they were brought down. Are honorable members going to submit to this decree
?
Is it not their intention at least to make an
effort to have those amendments, which they
looked upon as indispensable, adopted ? Their
position in relation to the Government confers
upon them an influence which they can never
exert more usefully than at present ; it is
their duty to exert that influence ; they are
responsible for the results of this measure,
which cannot be adopted without their concurrence. Their principal argument in support
of Confederation is that we have now an
excellent opportunity of obtaining favorable
conditions—an opportunity which will
probably never occur again, and one of which it is
their duty to avail themselves. But have the
honorable members made those conditions ?
Have they taken as great precautions to preserve intact the interests of nearly a
million
French Canadians entrusted to their care, as
they would have taken in making an agreement for the sale of a farm, or even the purchase
of a horse ? Have they made any conditions at all ? If they have made no conditions,
do they at least know what the fate is
that is reserved for us ? Do they know the
nature of the form of Government which will
be imposed on Lower Canada? Can they
say whether we shall have Responsible Government ? No ! for the Ministry refuses to
speak ; it will only speak when the measure
of Confederation shall have been adopted, and
when it is too late to raise any objections.
Responsible government would not be a very
efficacious remedy for the evils which I foresee, but it would, at all events, be
a means of
defence for us, and we ought not to reject it.
It is true that, accordig to the 4lst article
of the resolutions, " The local
governments
and legislature of each province shall be constructed in such manner as the existing
legislature of each such province shall provide."
But the English element is at present in the
majority. We are told that the English are
naturally favorable to responsible
government. That is true when it relates to themselves ; for how many years did Canada
remain without responsible government ? The
painful events of 1837 and 1838 were the
result of that anomaly in the parliamentary
system. Upper Canada will not need, as we
shall, a local responsible government ; it will
not have, as we shall have, to defend a nationality which will be in a minority in
the Federal Parliament, but which, at least, ought to
enjoy in Lower Canada those powers which
parliamentary authority everywhere accords
to the majority. Upper Canada only desires
to make of her local legislature a municipal
council on a large scale ; she will fight out
her quarrels in the wider arena of the
Federal Parliament. The English of Lower
Canada, who will gain nothing by having a
responsible local government, because that
government is the government of the majority, will unite their votes with those of
Upper
Canada to impose upon us the same system
of government as in the other section. The
local parliaments, in the event of that system
being adopted, having no part in the government, will
soon become perfectly useless, and
361
they will soon be dispensed with, just as
in a
machine we do away with useless and expensive wheelwork. Nothing will then be left
to
us but the legislative union which the honorable members have not ventured to propose,
because they are compelled to admit it would
be an act of crying injustice to Lower Canada. But we are told to rely on article
42,
which gives to the local legislatures the right
of amending or changing their Constitutions
from time to time, and it is said that when
Lower Canada is separated from Upper Canada, she may alter her Constitution if she
pleases, and adapt it to her own views. It
must not be forgotten, however,
that the
Lieutenant-Governor, who will enjoy the
right of reserving the bills of the Local Parliament for the sanction of the Governor
General, will be appointed by the Governor General in Council, that is to say, by
the Federal
Government, and, as a matter of course, it
must be expected that he will act in conformity with the views of the Federal Government.
Any bill reserved by him will require
to be sanctioned by the Federal Government,
which may refuse such sanction if they think
proper, as they undoubtedly will as regards
any bill the object of which might be to give
responsible government to Lower Canada,
whilst all the other provinces would only have
governments which were not responsible. And
the militia,—it will be exclusively under the
control of the Federal Government. Have
the honorable the French-Canadian members,
to whom I more particularly address myself
at this moment, reflected on the danger to us
that is contained in this provision ? It is with
reluctance that I once more allude to the difficulties which may arise between the
different
sections of the Confederacy, but it would be
wrong to shut our eyes to the future for fear
that it may appear too threatening. Did we
not, a few days ago, hear one of the honorable
members, who most warmly supports the Government, complain in this House that Upper
Canada was going to have four military
schools, whilst Lower Canada would only have
two ? Why should we vest in the Federal
Government the right of giving instruction in
the military art and of arming the other
provinces at the expense of Lower Canada ?
Why, while there is yet time,
should we neglect to take those salutary precautions on
which our existence as French-Canadians depend? Our Local Government ought to have
the same active part in the organization, instruction and equipment of our militia
which
belongs to all local governments which
form
part of other confederacies. But I was forgetting that this is to be a model Confederation,
which is to unite within itself all the
evils of the Federative system without including one of its advantages. I read in
the work
in favor of Confederation, to which I have
referred on more than one occasion, page 25,
as follows: "With them we offer protection
to your religion, to your institutions, and to
your civil laws," &c., &c. They offer to protect
the French-Canadians ; but when, under the
present Constitution, they can protect themselves, why should they abdicate the
right of so
doing ? Now they are strongly entrenched in
their citadel, and they are advised to raze the
walls in order to secure their safety. The
French Canadians, at the present day, are in a
better position than they were at the time of
the union. They are at the same time both
judges and suitors. They are asked to adopt
a new form of government ; it is not imposed
upon them ; and, to induce them to do so,
the hon. Minister of Agriculture tells them that
this new form of government was recommended
successively by Chief Justice SEWELL, Judge
ROBINSON, and Lord DURHAM. The names
alone of these three men ought to suffice to
open our eyes ; their avowed object always
was to obliterate French-Canadian nationality,
to blend the races into one only, and that the
English ; and to attain that end they recommended, as the Minister of Agriculture
has
told us, the system of government now submitted for our approval. In the last passage,
a few lines of which I have just cited, we
find at age 25 a phrase upon which I have
reflected seriously ; it is as follows, and is
placed
by the author in the mouths of the
English-Canadians of Lower Canada, " Remember that we, too, are inhabitants of Lower
Canada, and that we, too, aspire to other and
nobler destinies." I asked of myself, with
all seriousness, what then are the aspirations
of the French-Canadians ? I have always
imagined, indeed I still imagine, that they all
centre in one point, the maintenance of their
nationality as a shield destined for the protection of the institutions they hold
most dear.
For a whole century this has ever been the
aim of the French-Canadians ; in the long
years of adversity they have never for a moment lost sight of it ; surmounting all
obstacles,
they have advanced step by step towards its
attainment, and what progress have they not
made ? What is their position to-day ? They
number nearly a million, they have no longer,
362
if they are true to themselves, to fear
the fate
of Louisiana, which had not as many inhabitants, when it was sold by NAPOLEON to the
United States, as Canada had in 1761. A
people numbering a million does not vanish
easily, especially when they are the owners of
the soil. Their number is rapidly increasing.
New townships are being opened in every
direction, and being peopled with industrious
settlers. In the Eastern Townships, which it
was thought were destined to be peopled entirely by English settlers, these latter
are
slowly giving way to the French-Canadians.
There is a friendly rivalry between the two
races, a struggle of labor and energy ; contact
with our fellow-countrymen of English origin
has at last opened our eyes ; we have at last
comprehended that in order to succeed, not
only labor is needed, but well-directed and
skilled labor, and we profit by their example
and by the experience they have acquired in
the old countries of Europe. Agriculture
with us is now becoming an honorable pursuit ;
the man of education is no longer ashamed to
devote himself to it. Our farmers feel the necessity and desire of attaining perfection
in the
art. We possess magnificent model farms, in
which we can learn the science of agriculture.
We are entering a new era of prosperity.
The French-Canadians hold a distinguished
position in the commerce of the country ;
they have founded banks and savings banks ;
on the St. Lawrence between Quebec and
Montreal, they own one of the finest lines of
steamboats in America ; there is not a parish
on the great river which has not its steamboat ;
the communications with the great towns are
easy ; we have railways, and we now measure
by hours the duration of a journey which formerly we measured by days ; we have foundries
and manufactories, and our shipbuilders have obtained a European renown. We
have a literature peculiarly our own ; we have
authors, of whom we are justly proud ; to them
we entrust our language and our history ; they
are the pillars of our nationality. Nothing denotes our existence as a people so much
as our literature ; education has penetrated everywhere ;
we have several excellent colleges, and an university in which all the sciences may
be studied
under excellent professors. Our young men
learn in the military schools how to defend
their country. We possess all the elements
of a nationality. But a few months ago, we
were steadily advancing towards prosperity,
satisfied with the present and confident in the
future of the French-Canadian people. Suddenly discouragement, which had never overcome us in our adversity, takes
possession of
us ; our aspirations are now only empty
dreams ; the labors of a century must be
wasted ; we must give up our nationality,
adopt a new one, greater and nobler, we are
told, than our own, but then it will no longer
be our own. And why? Because it is our
inevitable fate, against which it is of no use
to struggle. But have we not already struggled against destiny when we were more feeble
than we are now, and have we not triumphed ?
Let us not give to the world the sad spectacle
of a people voluntarily resigning its nationality. Nor do we intend to do so.
Let the
people have time given them to understand
the question ; let their opinion on the subject
be obtained at the polls. It is but their right,
unless our form of government is a delusion
and a snare. If the measure is a good one,
what danger is there in discussing it ? If the
new Constitution it is proposed to give us is
to last for centuries, why should we not at
least endeavor to make it as perfect as possible ? Why press its adoption before it
is
understood ? In conclusion, I object to the
proposed Confederation, first, as a Canadian,
without reference to origin, and secondly, as
a French-Canadian. From either point of
view, I look upon the measure as a fatal error ;
and, as a French-Canadian, I once more appeal
to my fellow-countrymen, reminding them of the
precious inheritance confided to their keeping
—an inheritance sanctified by the blood of
their fathers, and which it is their duty to
hand down to their children as unimpaired as
the received it. (Cheers.)
The debate
was then adjourned.
This individual participated in:
