LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.
Wednesday, February 8, 1865.
HON. MR. ROSS continued the debate as
follows :—Honorable gentlemen will remember
that I yesterday moved the adjournment with
the intention of replying to the remarks of the
hon. member from Niagara Division (Hon.
MR. CURRIE), who engaged the attention of
the House during most of its sitting. From
its commencement to its conclusion, the speech
of that honorable gentleman was of a most
remarkable character. At its very outset he
took the opportunity of quoting some parts of
the first speech he made in this chamber, two
years ago, in which he strongly approved of
the principle of a Confederation between
Canada and the Lower Provinces, and in some
portions of his yesterday's speech he reiterated
in a very decided manner his approval of such
a scheme. But other parts of his speech were
of such a character that if any of the promoters of Confederation had been at first
inclined to number him among the friends of
72
Intercolonial Union, they might
afterwards
have said "save us from our friends." (Hear.)
He took the very singular course of first
decrying the credit of the Lower Provinces,
and then decrying that of Canada itself, endeavoring to show first that we were making
a very bad bargain in uniting our destiny
with such poor provinces as they were,
and afterwards that such was our state
of bankruptcy that they would be very
foolish indeed in joining their fate with
ours. (Laughter.) It would, indeed, be almost
a sufficient answer to the honorable member to take his speech in separate paragraphs
and to place certain of them opposite to others
as the reply, for a more illogical and inconsequential address I hardly ever heard.
Nor
was he content with dealing in what he thought
was irony or sarcasm, but ventured to attack
important statements of fact made by the public men of this and the other provinces.
Now,
if we are to have a Confederation at all, I think
we should be careful what language we use with
respect to such men, and what statements
we
place before the public. If language such as
the hon. member permitted himself to use he
encouraged, it will be impossible
to secure the
good feeling and harmony which are indispensably necessary to the well-working of
the
contemplated union. I am, however, satisfied
that the sober sense of the House will condemn
such language, not only when it comes from
the hon. member for Niagara, but when falling
from any other hon. member. (Hear, hear.)
The hon. member commenced his attacks upon
the public men of the provinces by quoting
from a speech of Mr. LYNCH, recently delivered at Halifax, and did his best to turn
it
into ridicule, as well as to excite contemptuous
laughter at the expense of that gentleman.
Now the statements Mr. LYNCH made are
facts, not foolish inventions, as
the hon. member pretended. That gentleman spoke by
the book, and relied for his information upon
the official report of one of our public departments, and if the hon. member will
turn to
the census of 1852, he will find, at
page 32, a
table comparing the produce of Canada and
the United States, from which it appears that,
while that of the latter increased 48 per cent.,
that of Canada increased 400 per cent. during
the previous decade. This is what Mr. LYNCH
stated, and what the hon. member for Niagara
asserted to be untrue.
HON. MR. CURRIE—That was between
the years 1841 and 1851, while the remarks
of Mr. LYNCH had reference to the subsequent
decade.
HON. MR. ROSS—It is not so; Mr. LYNCH
spoke of an increase of ten years; he read
from our official records in proof, and read
correctly. The hon. member probably derived
his information from some newspaper, and the
error he has committed should teach him to be
more cautious how he assails public men on
such evidence. (Hear, hear.) He then turned
from Mr. LYNCH to the Premier of New
Brunswick, a gentleman of the highest character and ability, who is so strong in the
esteem and confidence of the people of that
province that it seems impossible to displace him.
Now I maintain that, to say the least it is in
extremely bad taste to attack high-placed
public men, especially those of other countries,
and more especially those of the sister colonies,
as the hon. member has done.
HON. MR. ROSS—The hon. member has
attacked their veracity; he has denied the correctness of the statements they made
openly
as public men. The Hon. Mr. TILLEY
quoted
the figures of our own Minister of Finance,
and the hon. member represented
him as not
speaking the truth, but as, in effect, attempting
to deceive those whom he addressed.
HON. MR. CURRIE—I beg to know when
the Finance Minister of Canada stated that
the average duties collected in Canada were
11 per cent. The figures-
HON. MR. ROSS—The honorable member
will find it in the Finance Minister's speech,
and while I do not think it proper in him
to interrupt me for the purpose of going into
calculations just at this moment, I maintain
that by taking all the imports, including those
free of duty, the honorable member will find
that the rate stated is exactly correct. The
imports in 1863 amounted to $45,964,493,
and the duty collected was $5,169,173,
which
is just 11 per cent. of the whole. I repeat,
honorable gentlemen, that, instead of making
such attacks on great public men, I conceive
it to be more properly our duty to defend
them. (Hear.) Having thus disposed of the
remarks the honorable member made on the
veracity of Mr. LYNCH and Hon. Mr. TILLEY,
I will now advert to that portion of his remarks
in which he endeavored to show that Hon. Mr.
GALT'S statements were incorrect. He referred
to the figures respecting the tonnage of the proposed Confederation, as quoted by
Hon. Mr.
GALT, and pooh=poohed his remarks in a way
which was no doubt intended to be very amusing.
The Minister of Finance declared that when
the Union was effected, we should be, he be
73lieved, the third largest country in the
world,
as regards the tonnage of our commercial
marine, though possibly France might be about
on an equality with us. England, he said,
was the first, the United States the second,
and either France or the contemplated Confederation would be the third ; and this
is true.
I will read the statement of that honorable
gentleman :-
The sea-going tonnage of Canada,
including
that of the inland lakes, amounts to about nine
million tons, a great portion of which, however,
represents the tonnage of vessels performing
the
coasting service, may of which frequently clear
and arrive in the course of one day. It is gratifying to know that the trade between
Canada and
the States on the other side of the lakes is of a
nature to give employment to a large portion of
this lake tonnage—amounting to 6,907,000 tons.
I cannot class that in the same category as the
tonnage arriving at Quebec and Montreal which,
in most cases, can only make two or three trips
per annum. The sea-going tonnage of Canada
amounts to 2,133,000 tons ; of New Brunswick,
1,386,000 tons ; of Nova Scotia,
1,432,000 tons.
Consequently the amount of
sea-going tonnage,
subject only to a small deduction, is actually
about five million tons.
The way the honorable Minister of Finance
made up his statement was exactly similar to
that in which the same kind of statistical
statements were made up in England, the
United States, and other great maritime
countries, the object being to show the actual
amount of tonnage employed during each year
in the carrying trade. It does not matter
whether a vessel is engaged in long or short
voyages ; if it be employed merely as a ferry,
the fact of its being so employed
in carrying
goods inwards or outwards is a proof that its
tonnage capacity is required by the trade of
the countries to and from which it plies.
(Hear.) But the honorable member
made it
appear untruly that the statement
of the honorable the Minister of Finance with respect to
the tonnage employed on the Canadian lakes
was put forth for the purpose of misleading
the public and inducing them erroneously to
believe that the Confederation will have a prominent place among the great maritime
nations
by reason of the tonnage employed in its
trade. Mr. GALT's statement was that the
sea-going tonnage of the proposed Confederation would be the third largest
employed in
the trade of the world, and the statistics regarding the tonnage of the inland waters
of
Canada were superadded to those of the seagoing tonnage of the Union. The two statements
were made perfectly distinct in every
table and every speech emanating from the
Minister of Finance or his department. It
is thus the honorable member has availed
himself of his position for the purpose of
trying to throw dirt upon our leading statesmen—of endeavoring to asperse the characters
of our most distinguished public men,
and I repeat, for I cannot too strongly urge
it upon the House, that we ought to discountenance such attempts, for we should consider
the character of our public men as
public property, not to be lightly attacked
and damaged. If we are to enter into this
scheme, we should at least do so unassailed by
our own people, and with as good a public
reputation as we deserve. (Hear, hear.) The
honorable member next proceeded to read extracts from old Globes and other newspapers,
in which, with the characteristic features and
bitter feelings of the times in which they
were written, certain things were stated not
specially commendatory of some of the Canadian ministers now concerned in the preparation
of the Confederation scheme. I am not
here to defend these gentlemen—the Hon.
Messrs. BROWN and MCDOUGALL, his own
party leaders, whom he attacked—nor do I
intend to make remarks upon past events, but
this I will say, that the parties alluded to
have entered upon their present work with the
sincere intention, I believe, of putting an end
to the grave difficulties which have so long
distracted the country. This they have done
with the full concurrence and approbation of
their political friends, whose advice they
sought before entering the Administration ;
and I think that, under the circumstances,
instead of being reproached and held up to public censure, they ought to be treated
with confidence and generosity. I have hitherto
always listened to the honorable member with
pleasure, even when I could not agree with
him, and even in certain parts of the speech
to which I am now referring, the honorable
member exhibited considerable ability ; but
I do think, considering it as a whole, that
a more illogical, self-contradictory, and generally objectionable address has seldom
been
made in the Canadian Legislature. Upon
reviewing the general effect of this remarkable effort, can only compare it with
the performances of the Parrott
guns discharged against Fort Fisher, six of which, we
have been told, slightly wounded two of the
enemy, but killed and disabled about fifty of
the men who served them. I take it that
Hon. Messrs. TILLEY and LYNCH have got
off with very slight wounds indeed, and that
74
any damage done is to the honorable
member's
own friends. (Hear, hear, and laughter.)
I
will now come more closely to the subject
under debate, the proposed Confederation of
Canada and the other British North American
colonies, and in doing so I feel I am dealing
with a matter in which is bound up the happiness and prosperity of the country, not
for
the present only, but for a long course of years
to come. I only wish the honorable member
for the Niagara Division had read the debates
which preceded the establishment of the American Constitution after the United States
had
gained their independence. I especially advert
to the debates in the Councils of Virginia,
which at that time, by reason of its wealth and
population, bore a similar relation to the other
colonies to that which Canada now bears to the
Lower Provinces. If he had read the speeches
of the MADISONS, the MARSHALLS, the
RANDOLPHs, the HENRYS, the LEES and others, he
would have found no passage in keeping with
the sentiments he uttered yesterday. Those
great patriots evidently met under a deep sense
of the responsibilities of their work, and instead
of bringing into the debates the small village
feelings and animosities tending to embarrass
and to destroy harmony, they
acted like great
men, true and noble men as they were, and
applied themselves to their task with the purpose of bringing it to a successful issue.
he
confederation which they first established, in
the year 1781, did not work well. It
remained poor, without respect abroad, or
prosperity at home, and so in 1789 they abandoned that condition of existence and
adopted
the Constitution which lasted until the commencement of the present unfortunate war,
and now governs the North. In speaking of
the Constitution prepared by our delegates,
the honorable member for Niagara said it was
neither one thing nor another, it was neither
legislative nor federative, but
a mongre1 nondescript scheme between the two; a Constitution or which there was no
precedent in all
the world's history. Such, at least, was the
effect of the words he used. It happens,
however, to be a fact, that in opposition to the
profound and enlightened opinion of the honorable member, the work of the delegates
has
received the approbation of some of the most
eminent statesmen of England, as well as that
of the most distinguished and able writers for
the press of that country, which is at any rate
some small consolation. I will say that if the
delegates who met at Quebec and prepared
that instrument were incompetent for the task,
I do not know where others can be found to
do it better; and, after all, I think
that, notwithstanding the remarks of the honorable
member, the disinterested testimonies to the
value of the work done, coming from the
quarters I have indicated, will be
considered in
Canada as having some weight. (Hear,
hear.)
But since the honorable member regards this
as a mongrel constitution, unworthy of acceptance, ought he not to have been ready
to
suggest something better? Should he not as
a patriot have given the country the benefit of
his superior wisdom? It is of no use to look
for a better form to the constitution of the
ancient republics which have passed away,
their having ceased to exist being of itself
proof enough of their not being adapted to
our wants. The honorable member might
perhaps have cited the Swiss and Dutch republics, or the constitutions of
the United
tates of 1781 and 1789, and if he had, the
House would perhaps have been able to compare them with that now
proposed, and arrive
at some definite conclusion which might after
all have been that ours, as now proposed, is
that which promises best to secure freedom to
those who are to live under it, and stability
for the political condition of our country.
With respect to the Swiss Confederation,
however well it ma be considered to have
worked, it is a fact that within our own time
a civil war has existed among the cantons,
and that republic has been upon the brink of
destruction. As regards the Dutch republic, it is a matter of history how it fell.
During the whole of its struggle against
PHILIP II., the provinces comprising it never
had that centralized power which is necessary
to the stability of a government, especially one
assailed by enemies from without, for two
provinces, Guelderland and Overyssel, contributed nothing all that contest througheach
standing upon its state rights—while
among the remaining five, by far the largest
proportion was contributed by the one Province of Holland. The natural result was
that
the republic fell, and became a monarchy.
The same evil lay at the root of the American
Constitution of 1781, and after it had been
adopted, so ill concerted and disunited were the
efforts of the thirteen states,
that the arrangement would not work at all, so that General
WASHINGTON was obliged to ask for
and actually obtained dictatorial powers, to enable him
to carry on the contest against Great Britain.
The difficulties between the North and the
South which now prevail, arose wholly upon
the question of state rights, and had provisions
existed in the Constitution of the American
75
Union, similar to those which it is
proposed to
introduce into ours, the probability is the
States would have remained united. (Hear,
hear.) But the hon. member said further
that the scheme has taken the country by surprise. Now, I really beg to ask whether
there
is any foundation for such a statement? I
most deliberately say that there is not. It
must be well known to hon. members that the
late Chief Justice SEWELL, who
enjoyed the
friendship of the Duke of KENT, the father of
Her Majesty the Queen, so far back as 1814,
addressed a letter to the noble Duke, recommending an union, for this fact is adverted
to
in Lord DURHAM'S report on the affairs
of
the British North American Provinces.
Some
ten or twelve years before even that, the Hon.
Mr. UNIACKE, of Nova Scotia, had made a
similar suggestion, and from time to time,
since then, the importance and desirability of
the project has been openly advocated by leading public men in all the colonies. Amongst
others, I may mention Archdeacon
STRACHAN,
the present venerable and Right Reverend
Bishop of Toronto, whose enlightened opinions upon great public questions, have always
commanded the utmost respect, and who,
writing to Mr. CHARLES BULWER, the able
Secretary of Lord DURHAM, in 1838 expressed himself as follows:-
I have
only to add that it will be a pleasure to
me to contribute everything in my power to the
prosperous issue of Lord DURHAM'S Administration ; and if Mr. PITT considered
the Constitution
which he conferred upon the Canadas one of the
glories of his life, what glory must redound to
the statesmen who give a free
Constitution to the
British North American colonies, and by consolidating them into one territory or kingdom,
exalts
them to a nation acting in unity, and under the
protection of the British
Government; and thus
not only ensuring their
happiness, but preventing
for ever the sad consequences that might arise
from a rival power getting possession of their
shores.
Then
it was formally presented and recommended in Lord DURHAM'S remarkable report
on Canada and British North America
generally, so often quoted as a high authority, and
only yesterday
by the honorable member himself. Well, what did that distinguished nobleman say on
the subject. He said :-
How inseparably
connected I found the interests of Your Majesty's Provinces
in North America,
to what degree I met with common disorders, requiring common remedies is an important
topic,
which it will be my duty to discuss
very fully before closing this report.
Again—On
my first arrival in Canada, I was
strongly inclined to the project of a
Federal union,
and it was with such a plan in view that I discussed a general measure for the government
of
the colonies with the deputations from the Lower
Provinces, and with various leading individuals
and public bodies in both the Canadas.
But I had still more strongly impressed
on me
the great advantage of an united government, and
I was gratified by finding the leading minds of the
various colonies strongly and generally inclined to
a scheme that would elevate their countries into
something like a national existence.
Lord DURHAM, after expressing his 'opinion
in the report as on the whole in favor of the
Legislative Union, and referring to the influence of the United States as surrounding
us
on every side, goes on to say :-
If we wish to prevent the extension of
this influence, it can only be done by raising up for the
North American Colonist some
nationality of his
own, by elevating these small and unimportant
communities into a society having some objects
of a national importance, and by thus giving their
inhabitants a country which they will be unwilling
to see absorbed even into one more powerful.
An union for common defence against
foreign
enemies is the natural bond of connection that
holds together the great communities of the
world, and between no parts of any kingdom or
state is the necessity for such an union more
obvious than between the whole of these colonies.
The whole of this branch of this
remarkable
report on the subject of an union
of the
British American Provinces should be read
by every man in the several provinces, the
arguments in its favor are so able and so
unanswerable. (Hear, hear.) I will honestly
say, as many others have said before me, that
if it could have been attained, I would have
preferred a Legislative Union, but it is well
understood that Lower Canada would never
have agreed to it.
HON. MR. ROSS—Nor, as my honorable
and gallant friend the Premier states, would
the Lower Provinces have consented to it.
He may well be supposed to know, for he was
in the Conference, presiding over its deliberations, and had the very best opportunity
of
ascertaining the opinions of the
delegates.
(Hear.) But coming down to later timesthe times so well described by
the hon.
Premier in his excellent speech—when difficulties between Upper and Lower Canada
began to thicken, the Hon. Mr. GALT brought
up the scheme of Colonial Federation as the
best mode of overcoming those difficulties,
and made a most able speech on the subject in
his place in Parliament. Subsequently, in
76
1858, that honorable minister entered the
Government with the express understanding
that the question would be dealt with. It
is well known that he carried his point so far,
that the subject was alluded to at the close of
the session of 1858, in the Speech of Sir
E. HEAD, the Governor General, and communication with the Imperial Government for
permission to negotiate with the Lower Provinces on the subject was then undertaken.
Shortly after this, three members of the Government, viz., Hon. Messrs. CARTIER,
GALT,
and myself, went to England, and on the 25th
of October, 1858, we laid our request before
the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Sir
E. B. LYTTON, but difficulties,
not of our
creation, intervened and caused delay—Lord
DERBY's Government was defeated, and
the matter continued in abeyance. To say,
in the face of the facts I have stated, that
the project is unknown and has taken the
country by surprise, is to say what is
not the case. Even last year it was distinctly referred to in is Excellency's
Speech at the close of the Session, and Hon.
Messrs. BROWN, MCDOUGALL and MOWAT
entered the Government with the express
understanding that negociations were to ensue
to bring about the proposed Federation.
Hon. Messrs. BROWN and MOWAT went
back to their constituents and were re-elected
by acclamation, and although Hon. Mr.
MCDOUGALL was defeated, he too was subsequently elected for another constituency by
acclamation. These gentlemen, instead of being decried and assailed for the part they
have acted, should be honored for their
patriotism. There has been no such thing
as surprise. The resolutions were sent to all
the members of the Legislature shortly after
they were fully settled upon, and even before
that the plan was published in all the newspapers of the province, and I am
at a loss to
know how it could have been made more public. It is true the Opposition have not held
public meetings to consider or object to the
scheme, but the reason of this is, that the
majority in its favor is so enormously large
that they did not venture to do so. (Hear.)
The next piece of disingenuousness on the
part of the honorable member was in stating
the military power of the Lower Provinces at
65,000 fighting men, or in limiting to that
number the men competent for military service—
HON. Mn. CURRIE—No; I said 128,000,
of whom 65,000 only were available, the rest
being engaged on the water.
HON. MB. ROSS—Why did not the honorable member candidly state their census
population, which at this time cannot be much
short of a million souls?
HON. SIR E. P. TACHÉ—With the permission of the honorable member I will state
the result of my experience in this matter. I
have been for some time attached to the
Adjutant General's office, where I had the
opportunity of examining the particularly correct returns of the Militia for Lower
Canada,
and it always appears that out of a given
population of both sexes the one-fifth part
shows the exact number of men, between the
ages of 18 and 60, fit for military duty. This
is the case all the world over. The law is as
uniform as that which determines the relative
numbers of the two sexes; in all Christian
countries the males being 21 and a fraction to
20 females, while in countries where polygamy
exists the case is exactly reversed, the females
being 21 and a fraction, and the males 20. I
have verified the fact that one-fifth of our
population shows the correct number of militiamen, and if the honorable member (Hon.
Mr.
CURRIE) will apply to the Adjutant General
he will find it was so.
HON. MB. CURRIE—I have taken the
figures as furnished by a colleague of the
honorable member.
HON. SIR E. P. TACHÉ—Then my colleague must be in contradiction with myself.
The number of militia-men in Upper Canada,
by the last census, was 280,000, which, multiplied by 5, gives the population, with
a few to
spare.
HON. MR. ROSS—I think it is now unnecessary for me to say anything else on this
subject, as the honorable member has been
fully answered by my honorable friend the
Premier. All that I need add is that according to the rule now stated, the million
of
souls in the Lower Provinces would produce
200,000 instead of 65,000 men, all capable of
bearing arms, those employed on the water
being as liable to serve as those employed on
the land. I trust we shall never require to
muster our fighting men from any part of the
proposed Confederation; but the best preventative of danger is preparedness to meet
it.
(Hear.) The honorable member next came
to the question of the Intercolonial Railway,
which after all seems to be his great peculiar
horror—the great pillar which overshadows
and oppresses him. Well, I will turn again
to Lord DURHAM'S report, in which the following passage, remarkably apposite to the
subject, appears:-
77
The completion of any satisfactory communication between Halifax and Quebec would,
in
fact, produce relations between these Provinces
that would render a general union absolutely
necessary. Several surveys proved that a railway
would be perfectly
practicable the whole way.
* * * * * * The formation of a railroad
from Halifax to Quebec would entirely alter some
of the distinguishing characteristics of the Canadas. Instead of being shut out from
all direct
intercourse with England during half the year,
they would posses a far more certain and speedy
communication throughout the
winter than they
now possess in summer.
This passage greatly impressed the public
men of the day—the LAFONTAINE-BALDWIN Administration—in which Mr. HINCKS
and the honorable Premier each had a
place. It was under them that the railway
legislation of the province received its first
impulse, and last session I
remember to have
had occasion to quote the preamble of an act
passed in 1851, which recites:-
That, whereas it is of the highest
importance
to the progress and welfare of this province, that
a Main Trunk line of railway should be made
throughout the length thereof, and from the
eastern frontier thereof through the provinces of
New Brunswick and Nova Scotia to the city and
port of Halifax; and it is therefore expedient
that every effort should be made to ensure the
construction of such railway.
The second clause of the act
Authorizes the Government, for the time
being, to negotiate with the Imperial Government
and New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, for the
construction of the line, and to bargain therefor;
the funds to be obtained under Imperial guarantee.
This act, honorable gentlemen, is still in
force, and from the time of its passing there has
always been an anxiety among the public men
of Canada to accomplish the construction of a
railway to Halifax. All our governments,
without exception, have felt in the same way,
and the MACDONALD-SICOTTE Administration
took steps towards such an end. But the
difficulties which followed stopped further progress, and, in fact, had almost stopped
legislation altogether. Now, however, the Hon. Mr.
BROWN himself has made the construction of
this railway a part of the proposed Constitution, and has said, at a great meeting
in Toronto, that if the project contained half-a-dozen
intercolonial railways he would go for them all.
(Hear, hear.) I feel morally certain that if
the subject were fairly discussed in every town
in Upper Canada, nine-tenths of the people
would go heartily for it. Indeed, the
railway
is absolutely necessary and we cannot do
without it. Upper Canada alone, not to
speak
of Lower Canada at all, requires it, and so
well is this understood in the Lower Provinces
that an opponent of the Hon. Mr. TILLEY-
Hon. Mr. SMITH—has lately said it was quite
unnecessary for New Brunswick to spend any
money on the work, as Upper Canada must
build it for its own sake. As to the cost of
this road, which has been so greatly exaggerated, Mr. BRYDGES, who must be supposed
to
know something about the matter, has offered,
on behalf of an English company, to undertake the construction of the line for ÂŁ3,500,000
sterling. Everybody knows how much that
is, and when reciprocity is gone, Upper
Canada will do well to build the road on its
own account, if all the other provinces refuse.
They will however not refuse, for the line is equally necessary for Lower Canada
and the
other provinces, and it is a great
advantage to
all parties that it should be so. New Brunswick requires it to open up its
rich interior
country which contains, as I have learned from
advance reports of subordinate surveying engineers, some of the finest lands in the
world.
Halifax wants it, in order to bring freight to
her great seaport when those of Quebec and
Montreal are closed. It should have been
commenced three years ago, and if it had it
would now be built, and we should have heard
nothing about the abolition of the Reciprocity
Treaty. (Hear, hear.) The honorable member
then asked why, since there was to be a dissolution and an appeal to the people of
New
Brunswick on the subject, there should not be
one in Canada? The answer to that has already been given. The term of Parliament
would have expired in that province on the
1st of June, and as the members would then
have had to go to their constituents to give an
account of their conduct during the previous
four years, it was thought better to anticipate
the time of its dissolution by three or four
months. In Nova Scotia and Newfoundland,
however, where the elections were more
recent, there are to be no elections. I will
add that this mode of appealing to the people
is not British but American, as under the
British system the representatives of the people in Parliament are presumed to be
competent to decide all the public questions submitted to them. When the unions between
England and Scotland, and between England and
Ireland were effected, there were no appeals to
the people, it being assumed that the people's
chosen representatives were quite competent to
judge of the measures. (Hear,
hear.) Yet
the members who have recently gone to the
country have found public opinion to be de
78cidedly in favor of the project. One
honorable
member (Hon. Mr. MACPHERSON) who
represents 130,000 souls, has told the House that
he has held meetings all over the vast Division
for which he sits, and that in every case he
has explained the subject to them without
finding a single person to oppose it. (Hear.)
The honorable member for Niagara also said,
that the project has been unfairly brought down.
Now, I contend that it was brought down in
the only way in which it could be submitted
to us or to the people. Such a censure as this
is beyond my comprehension, and it has certainly not been shown to my satisfaction,
nor
I should imagine, to that if any body else, in
what the unfairness consists. (Hear.) Next
the honorable member attacked the financial
terms of the scheme, and rolled up a mass of
figures which I strongly suspected the honorable member himself did not understand.
Hear, and laughter.) The Minister of
Finance fully and lucidly stated the case last
evening, and I will read part of his speech
to show how satisfactory the matter was
explained.
Hon. Mr. GALT said:
With reference to the trade of this
country, he
had taken the returns of 1863. The returns of
the trade of Canada, in that year, taking exports
and imports conjointly, showed an aggregate of
$87,795,000. Taking the census of
1861, this
trade represented thirty-five dollars per head of
the population. The value of the import and export trade of New Brunswick, for the
same year,
reached $16,729,680, amounting
to sixty-six dollars per head of its population. The aggregate
trade of Nova Scotia, for the same period, amounted to $18,622,359, or fifty-six
dollars per head of
its people. And in the case of Prince Edward
Island, the import and export trade amounted to
$3,055,568, representing
thirty-seven dollars per
head of the population of that colony. The value
of the total trade of Newfoundland was $1[?],245,032, or eighty-six dollars per head.
The whole
of these figures represents an aggregate trade of
all the provinces, amounting to $137,447,567.
(Hear, hear.)
With respect to the revenue and
expenditure
of the provinces, I find a succinct statement in
the speech delivered by Mr. GALT, at Sherbrooke, as follows:-
|
Revenue. |
Expenditure. |
| Nova Scotia ......... |
$1,185,629 |
$1,072,274 |
| New Brunswick ...... |
899,991 |
884,613 |
| Newfoundland (1862.). |
480,000 |
479,420 |
| Prince Edward Island.. |
197,384 |
171,718 |
| Canada .............. |
9,760,316 |
10,742,807 |
| Total, 1863...... |
$12,523,320 |
13,350,832 |
| Total, 1864 ...... |
14,223,320 |
13,350,832 |
| Estimated Surplus, 1864 |
............ |
$87,2488 |
The Hon. Minister of Finance. made some
admirable remarks, at Sherbrooke, with reference to the indebtedness of the colonies,
where
he gave to a public meeting the following table:
| Nova Scotia.....(1863) ........ |
$ 4,858,547 |
| New Brunswick.... " ........ |
5,702,991 |
| Newfoundland ...... (1862) ........ |
946,000 |
| Prince Edward Island ............ |
240,673 |
| Total, Maritime Provinces. . . |
$11,748,211 |
| Canada, (1863) ........ . .......... |
67,263,994 |
| Grand Total ................ |
$79,012,205 |
Reasoning from these figures, Mr. GALT
stated that the debt of Canada amounts at the
present time to about $27 per
head, and
that to enter into an equitable arrangement
with the other provinces where the debts
were about $25 par head either ours had
to be reduced or theirs increased ; that
is, when made chargeable to the Confed
eration—and as the former is the preferable
course, the surplus or excess of ours over $25
per head has to be locally assumed by Canada. He also explained that the debts of
Prince Edward Island and of Newfoundland
being less than $25 per head, an allowance
had to be made to them to place them on
an equal footing with the rest of the colonies.
I will add, for the information of the honorable member for Niagara, the following
official
figures, which are instructive as showing that
the people of the Maritime Provinces are a
people who contribute, under their present tariffs, a considerable sum to their respective
treasuries:
| Duty on imports per head |
(1863). |
| Newfoundland ................ |
$3.53 |
| Nova Scotia .................. |
2.46 |
| New Brunswick ................ |
2.81 |
| Prince Edward Island ........... |
1.69 |
| Canada ..................... |
1.85 |
Looking
at all these facts together, the
conclusion appears to me irresistible
that the
arrangement proposed is in every respect
an
equitable one, and that it has been made with
a view to give to each province as nearly as
possible what is right and fair, as far as what
is right could be discovered. No honorable
member could wish that Canada should have
undue advantages over the other parties
to the
compact. The spirit in which the deliberations
of the Conference were conducted was the
correct one, and had its members tried to overreach each other—had they not been impressed
with the necessity of mutual concessions for
the common good—no result could ever have
been arrived at. (Hear, hear.) The next
point the honorable member touched was the
79
assets of the Lower Provinces, and he
asked
very emphatically what they had to bring into
the partnership. He said we had our valuable
canals, but what had they? Well, they have
their own railways, built with provincial money.
New Brunswick has 200 miles, equal in value
to eight millions of dollars; and Nova Scotia
150 miles or thereabouts, equal to about six
millions of dollars—though I am not sure of
the exact extent.
HON. MR. ROSS—What do our canals
pay? That, however, is not the question; our
canals are assets and valuable assets too, even
though they do not pay much directly, for they
cheapen transport to an extraordinary extent.
I remember the time when the freight of a
barrel of flour from Toronto to Montreal cost
one dollar, and now it is 10d; and one cwt. of
merchandize brought back also cost one dollar
then, but now only 1s. It is in this way that
great public works are valuable to a country.
As to the earnings of the Lower Province
railways, the net profits—not the gross receipts
—are stated, I believe, at $140,000
; $70,000
in New Brunswick, and $70,000 in Nova Scotia, which, at any rate, is something. The
Welland Canal, of which the
honorable gentleman spoke so much, did not pay even the
interest on its cost; and if the canal on the
American side of the Niagara is constructed,
as we learn from the American press it is to
be, the chief source of its revenue will be cut
off, and so far from being the
best of the canals
in a paying point of view, it will be the worst
of all those connected with the
St. Lawrence
navigation. Let me not be understood, however, as depreciating the value of the Welland
Canal. None is more ready than I am to
admit that its construction was
wise, and that
it has proved and will continue to prove beneficial in the highest degree. (Hear.)
The
honorable member, living as he does on the
very banks of the Welland Canal,
very naturall asked how the canals are to
be enlarged?
Well, they will be the property of the General
Government, and when the trade requires it,
that Government will, no doubt, appropriate
money for the work. (Hear.) As to local
taxation, all the provinces will put upon the
same footing, and nothing can be fairer. If
Upper Canada, which it is asserted is so
much wealthier than the other portions of
the Confederation, requires more than the
eighty cents per head allowed to all the
provinces, its greater wealth will cause it
feel the taxation so much the
less. (Hear.)
The honorable member next attacked the pro
posed constitution of the Legislative
Council,
and insisted not only that it should have remained elective, but that the principle
of
representation according to population should
also have prevailed. But who ever heard that
in a Federal Constitution the Upper House
should be arranged on that principle? If
that view be the sound one, the better way
would be to have but one House, for the only
effect of having two Houses, both elected on the
basis of population, would be that one would
constantly be combating the other, and the
wheels of government would unavoidably be
brought to a stand-still. In such a case the
more powerful members of the Confederacy
would be wholly unrestrained, and would completely overwhelm the weaker. This was
fully considered on the adoption of a Constitution for the United States, according
to which
it is well known that the smaller states are
represented in the Senate by the same number
of senators as the larger ones—there being two
members for each. The same principle has
been adopted in arranging the terms of this
proposed union, and for the same reason; viz.,
to protect the weaker parties to the compact.
(Hear.) The next point referred to by the
honorable member related to the Common
Schools and the fund proposed to be created
by the Act of 1849, but as the honorable
member has been informed, one of its provisions, that relating to this fund. has never
been carried out; with respect to the other,
my honorable friend the Commissioner of
Crown Lands has already explained that
the million of acres have been set apart and
a fund year by year created, while Parliament has annually set apart about $100,000
for the support of the schools. Upper Canada
then has suffered no injustice in this. (Hear.)
The honorable member at last concluded his
remarks by drawing a sorry picture of the
condition of Canada. According
to him, it
was about bankrupt when a number of self-
appointed delegates met and devised this
scheme for its further embarrassment. So
far from this being the case, it is a matter
of history that the Government was formed
expressly for the purpose of considering and
framing this very scheme, and getting rid of
the dead-locks which have so injuriously affected
the legislation of the country. It appeared
that by the time the honorable member came
to this part of his speech he became so excited
that he hardly knew what he was saying.
(Hear, hear.) I will conclude by reading
an
extract from a remarkable speech delivered by
His Honor the Speaker (the Honorable U.J.
80
TESSIER) at a public meeting held in
Quebec
in 1858, when the three delegates were in
England pressing for Confederation. It is
as follows :-
In 1849 and 1852 there were passed acts
of
our Provincial Parliament to give some kind of
guarantee for the construction of this (the Inter-
colonial) Railway. As a member of the Canadian
Legislature, I pledge my best support to help
this enterprise, and as to the Canadian nationality,
distinct from the English or French nationality,
composed of the best qualities of both, to which
allusion has been made, I share in this sentiment,
and I hope to see growing a Canadian Empire in
North America, formed by a Federal Union of all
the colonies connected and linked together by
this Intercolonial Railway, that may hold a position able to counterbalance the grasping
power
of the United States on this
continent.
I refer to this able speech to show the
enlightened views which that honorable member
held on the subject, in common with many
other distinguished public men. I have now
done with the speech of the honorable member
for Niagara, and will only say further that I hope
the important subject before the House will
be fully and completely discussed, so that the
fine merits of the scheme may be thoroughly
understood. I know it will be discussed
calmly, with mutual forbearance and kindness,
and with the excellent dispositions which honorable gentlemen usually bring to the
consideration of the matters submitted for their
judgment. (Hear, hear, and applause.) I
feel satisfied that after such discussion the
House will complete its share of this great
work by assenting to the resolutions submitted
for its approval. (Hear, hear.)
HON. MR. ALEXANDER said—I am sure
that the members of the Government desire
that this great question should be freely and
fully discussed—I am sure they will be glad
to see any members of this House frankly
state wherein they conceived any of its details
to be defective—I am sure that the suggestions
by the honorable gentlemen who represent the
divisions of Victoria and Wellington will be
duly weighed by the present Administration,
as any other suggestions made in the spirit to
accomplish good. But some members in both
branches of the Legislature appear to be opposed to the Confederation scheme
in toto.- They hold that the constitutional changes proposed are unwise, and are fraught
with great
evil. The honorable member or Niagara Division (Hon. Mr. CURRIE) appears to be of
that number, from the very strong appeal
which he has made to this House against the
whole measure, and I desire to reply to some
of the arguments which he pressed, no
doubt
with very great force and ability, upon our
attention. He objects to the whole manner in
which the Convention was formed; he has no
faith whatever in the result of their deliberations. He maintains, in the boldest
manner,
that the proposed union will be found disadvantageous and burdensome to all the provinces
uniting. He produced figures, prepared beforehand, to show that our burdens will be
increased to the extent of at least $3,000,000
per annum—an increase which will be found
oppressive to the industry of the province of Canada. I cannot understand from what
source he has obtained his figures to arrive at
such a conclusion. There is no difficulty in
our being able to form a reliable idea as to
the future financial position of the proposed
federal and local governments. If we make
an estimate of the whole revenue of those
provinces from their financial returns, taking
the basis of 1863, we find that there will be a
net revenue, available for the purposes of the
General Government, after paying the subsidy
of eighty cents per head to the local governments, amounting to the sum of $9,643,108,
while we are justified in assuming that the
ordinary expenditure of the General Government will not exceed $9,000,000. But, of
course, there are always certain grants which
are not classed under ordinary expenditure,
and we shall have to provide for the Intercolonial Railway, and the widening and deepening
of the St. Lawrence canals; and suppose
that we allow the very liberal item of $25,000,000 for those great objects, it will
be admitted on all sides that we shall be enabled to
obtain this amount under the Imperial Guarantee at four per cent., thus throwmg upon
the
federal treasury the additional annual burden
or charge of $1,000,000, which we may, with
perfect right, say will be met in the following
manner. It can be clearly shewn that it rests
entirely with ourselves, whether we cannot
meet all the claims of ordinary expenditure
and interest on the federal debt with the
amount, already named, of $9,643,108; while
I am sure that most commercial men will allow
that, with the power which we shall have of
imposing uniform tariff and excise duties
throughout the whole united territory of these
united provinces, we shall raise sufficient additional revenue to meet this large
item. But
as I have, on a former occasion, said, we must
inaugurate the dawn of our infant
national career with the utmost care and prudence. All
jobbery and lavish expenditure must be carefully avoided; and if we do so, I venture
to
81
prophesy
that the anticipations of my honorable
friend from Niagara will never be realized. I
venture to say, in the face of all his evil forebodings of increased burdens and debt,
that we
shall find our position greatly improved. He
appeared in the delivery of his able and powerful speech, very desirous to make out
the
strongest possible case, raking up even the
public condemnation of the Provincial Secretary at the famous Harrington meeting.
I was
one of those who voted against Mr. SCOTT'S
Separate School Bill, valuing, in common with
the earnest electors at Harrington, our noble
school system of Upper Canada, which carries
the blessings of education throughout the
width and breadth of the land; but the people generally are not prepared to reject
the
proposed Confederation, because of the position of that question, although there are
individual electors who have strong convictions
on the subject. My honorable friend also
dwells upon the amount which will require to be
appropriated for the militia. He appears to
think that soldiers can be formed by magical
influence in a day, and to effect a small saving
he would elect to leave this magnificent territory, with its valuable homesteads,
exposed
to be swept at any moment by a ruthless
aggressor; or should not mind that our Canadian
people should run the risk of being subjected
to share the liability of three thousand millions of debt, inaddition to their own
burdens.
The great body of the people of Upper Canada have great faith in the expansion and
growth of a young country such as this. (Hear,
hear.) They do not forget the remarkable
fact, that after experiencing a large deficiency
in the revenue of the country for several years,
with also, in addition, two very indifferent
harvests, we are in a position to
announce a
considerable surplus of revenue
at this moment; and we look forward to this consolidation of other great interests,
full of hope, that
it will give us a higher standing in the world
—that it will give a great impetus to the
growth of our population, our commerce and
our revenue; and if the expenditure to be
made on those great public improvements
should swell the debt, we shall find ourselves
in a condition of such prosperity that it will
fall lightly upon us. There are so many conspiring circumstances to make us
regard this
great scheme with favor, the offspring,
as it
is presented to us, of the large experience and
matured judgment of the political
leaders of
all these provinces. (Hear, hear.) We may
venture to accept it and give it a fair trial as
the best solution of the difficulties we have experienced in working out our present
Legislative Union. It is very true that we have all
opposed until now the construction of the Intercolonial Railway, because we have had
grave
doubts as to the commercial value of that
work, and the prospect of its being self-sustaining; but it certainly cannot be denied
that the unfriendly attitude assumed towards
us by the neighboring republic in respect to
the trade relations between the two countries,
makes it more prudential for us thus to
secure a winter road to the great highway
of the world's commerce—(hear, hear)—and
it will certainly place us in a stronger position to negotiate fair and just terms
in
a renewal or modification of the Reciprocity
Treaty. Whilst that public work is accepted
as an indispensable part of the scheme, we are
glad to be assured by the members of the Government, that the deepening and widening
of
the St. Lawrence canals will be carried out
simultaneously. Good cannot fail to flow from
the union if justice is thus done to all its component parts. As regards the question
of
finance, the proposition to
assume the debts
upon a certain basis on the one hand, and to impose a uniform tariff on the other,
with certain
reasonable stipulations, is perhaps the nearest
approximation to dealing out common justice
to all, which could he arrived at, with so many
varied interests there represented. We know
that our own delegates contended, as we now
contend, that it would on] have been fair and
just that the future subsidy to be paid to each
province of eighty cents per head should
be
ased upon the census returns to be made
every ten years. But this is not the moment
to enlarge upon this point, or upon these details, to which, as I have before stated,
the
great bed of my constituents take exception,
and I will reserve myself, therefore, until we
discuss the details seriatim. I would only, in
conclusion, observe, that our most enlightened
citizens see nothing but weakness and insecurity in our present fragmentary
position, while
they regard the proposed union as calculated
in every way to give us importance, standing
and strength—improve our credit—inspire a
feeling of confidence in our future, and bring
emigration to our shores. If we can look back
with just pride to our giant growth during the
last quarter of a century, so may we enter
upon the extended relations now proposed
full of hope, that with an accession of territory, populaltion and
power—commencing our
career with a volume of trade exceeding
$137,000,000, with such boundless
resources
to develop, and a country capable of sus82taining any extent of population, there
is no
barrier to our extension and material progress.
(Hear, hear.) We must feel that
such a field
for human enterprise and such a position is
calculated to give our people higher aspirations, and to make them cherish what may
at
the present moment be pronounced at this
stage of our infancy but a dream; that just
as the Russian Empire extends its powerful
sway from the Black Sea to the polar regions,
so may the people of British North America
aspire to raise up a great Northern Power
upon this continent, which shall be distinguished for the wisdom and stability of
its
institutions, which shall emulate the parent
countries from which its races have sprung, in
developing their manly virtues, and in diffusing
the blessings of a higher civilization wherever
its population may flow. (Cheers)
HON. MR. VIDAL said he cordially agreed
with the honorable gentleman who had spoken
in desiring a union of the provinces, and with
the Honorable Premier in believing that if such
union could be arranged to the satisfaction of all
the parties concerned, it ought to be effected.
Without exactly committing himself to the
opinion of the Honorable Premier that this
country was upon an inclined plane which, if
the proposed scheme of Confederation were
rejected, would land us in the United States,
he nevertheless thought that the arguments
which he had advanced to demonstrate the
necessity of some change which would secure
our future exemption from the difficulties
by which we were now beset were unanswered
and unaswerable. Yet he was obliged to
express his disapproval of the manner in which
the scheme had been submitted to Parliament,
as the course adopted entirely precluded the
Legislature from suggesting any improvement
or modification of its details. He felt, in
common with all other honorable members,
that the subject was one of vast importance;
that we were not legislating for the mere purpose of escaping from unpleasant party
political
difficulties, but for the safety
and prosperity
of our country and the welfare of our children
and descendants, and therefore could not agree
with the honorable member for Brock (Hon.
Mr. BLAIR), that immediate action was necessary and that any delay was dangerous.
Notwithstanding all that had been said of this
country being acquainted with the scheme and
prepared to adopt it, he did not
and could not
believe that such was the case; in arranging
its details no advice or assistance had been
sought from the representatives of the people,
and the people themselves were to have no
voice in the matter. The scheme was as
sumed to be perfect, and being perfect, must
be adopted by the House without change or
modification of any kind. It was said that
nine-tenths of the people were in its favor ;
he believed that a very large majority approved of the general principle of union,
but
there were details of the plan which did not
pass unchallenged. It was much to be regretted that the resolutions had not been introduced
in such a way as would have permitted the House to place upon record its
views in respect to any part of them which
might be unacceptable, and to suggest to
the
Imperial authorities who might frame the
bill, such amendments as it
considered desirable. He thought the honorable member for
Wellington (Hon. Mr. SANBORN) was in
error in proposing the amendments of which
he had given notice,—the resolutions before
them were not, properly speaking, resolutions
of the House, they must be
regarded as a
mere statement of certain agreements entered
into by other parties and communicated to us
for our information, and consequently could
not in any way be altered or amended. Honorable members were thus placed in an anomalous
position—invited to
discuss the whole
subject freely and their assistance requested,
and at the same time informed that no change
would be effected—that in fact the only
assistance wanted was the voting for the adoption of the scheme as a whole. Whatever
doubts may exist as to the change the proposed
union might effect either for good or for ill, he
thought there was no doubt that there would
necessarily be a vast increase of expense in
carrying on the Government: without mentioning specific sums, it must be obvious that
Canada would have to maintain two local
legislatures with all their appurtenances, in
addition to her share of the expense of the
Federal Legislature, which latter could scarcely
be expected to be less than at present. With
to the proposed change in the constitution of the Legislative Council, he was far
from
considering it a wise step; like the honorable
member for Niagara (Hon. Mr.
CURRIE), he
had great regard for the right of the franchise
as now enjoyed by the people, and felt that it
would be improper to vote away that privilege
of his constituents without their authority or
assent. He had been sent here by them to assist
in legislating under the Constitution we now
have, and not to change it. It was admitted by
all that the elective system had operated advantageously, and why then should it be
abandoned?—why initiate a retrograde move
83ment unsought for by the country ? Much
had been said about the risk of collision
between two elective Houses, that legislation
might come to a dead-lock; now it was a
remarkable fact that under the present system
there had been no such difficulties, while both
in England and in Canada, previous to the
introduction of the elective
system, they had
occurred, and on several occasions the power
of the Crown had been called in to overcome
them by appointing additional members.
What would be the position of
the House
under the new scheme ? It would be the
most irresponsible body in the world; and if a
dead-lock should occur there would be no way
of overcoming it, for the casualties of death,
resignation or acceptance of office, which had
been so strongly insisted upon as sufficiently
numerous to enable the Government of the
day to modify the character of the House,
would not in his opinion be adequate to meet
such an exigency. Such was apparently the
view of the Colonial Secretary; and it would
in all probability be found necessary to leave
the Crown unfettered in the exercise of its
preogative of apppointment. The honorable gentleman concluded by saying that he
would not now comment upon any other
details of the scheme, as he understood the
resolutions were to be discussed
seriatim, but
he did not very clearly see the advantage of
such a discussion when it was so distinctly
stated that the only question for the House to
determine was whether the scheme as now
submitted, unchanged and unchangeable,
should be rejected or adopted.
(Hear, hear.)
HON. SIR E. P. TACHÉ said the scheme,
it was true, must be taken as a whole, or rejected, since it was not the property
of the Government of Canada alone, but of
all the other
provinces as well. But it did not therefore
follow that honorable members who might dissent from some parts of it might not inscribe
that dissent on the journals. If the amendments proposed were passed, the motion for
an
Address would not be pressed; but, if they did
not carry, then the votes of the honorable members who had supported them would be
on record.
In former days, before the yeas and nays were
taken, it was the practice for members who
objected to any particular measure, in conformity with the practice of the House of
Lords,
to enter a protest on the journals exhibiting
their reasons for dissent, and
he knew of no
rule which would prevent such a course from
being pursued on the present occasion. It
was quite in the power of honorable members,
if they chose, to propose amendments, and so
secure the advantage of placing their
views
before the country.
Cries of " adjourn! adjourn!"
HON. MR. MOORE
said, as there was an
evident desire for an adjournment, he would
not occupy the time of the House for more
than a few minutes, his intention being merely
to refer to a portion of the remarks made
by the honorable gentleman (Hon. Mr. VIDAL)
who had just sat down. Though be generally
agreed in what had been said by that honorable member, there was one particular in
which
he (Hon. Mr. MOORE) thought he was in error.
He (Hon. Mr. VIDAL) seemed to have become
impressed with the idea that it was not competent for the House to amend the resolutions,
but
that they should either be adopted or rejected
as a whole. It was true the Government had
so laid it down, but he (Hon. Mr. MOORE) held
that the question could be dealt with in the
same manner as any other that might come
before the House. His honorable friend was
also of opinion that, if no suggestions or amendments were to be adopted, it was wasting
time
to discuss the scheme. In this respect he
(Hon. Mr. MOORE) begged to differ with the
honorable gentleman, holding that it was not
only useful, but essentially necessary that the
details of a measure fraught with such grave and
momentous importance to the country should
be thoroughly discussed. A calm and considerate discussion—and every latitude for
discussion—were necessary, and he hoped the
Government would not press the measure with
any unseemly haste, for they not only owed it
to the Legislature, but to the
country, that
ample opportunity for consideration of the
project should be afforded to
the people's
representatives. He also considered it important that members should have an opportunity
to confer with their constituents on the subject, in order to vote advisedly
when the time
came; and he trusted the Government would
not press the matter, nor hinder the expression
of views, even if those views extended to
amendment in certain particulars. The honorable gentleman then sat down, repeating
that he thought the House might deal with
the question as with any other that might
come before it.
The debate was then adjourned until the
morrow.
This individual participated in:
