LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.
FRIDAY, February 10, 1865.
Hon. MR. MACPHERSON, continued
his speech commenced yesterday, as follows :—In the remarks I offered to this
House yesterday, hon. gentlemen, I desired
to state my reasons for voting against the
amendment of my hon. friend from Wellington, and for the resolutions of Hon. Sir E.
P.
Taché. I stated that I believed the Confederation scheme was desired by an overwhelming
majority of the people of this
country, certainly by a very large majority of
my own constituents. I stated further that
as the resolutions had been before the
country for a long time—for a number of
months—and as there was no evidence whatever before us of their being disapproved
of as a whole, or indeed any one of them, we
had good reason to assume that the people
were satisfied. The press had published
them in full, and there was not one petition
against the measure. We have every right to
assume that the people are in favor of Confederation. I went on further, and said
that
during last autumn, I was constantly and
daily bringing the matter before a very large
constituency, where it was always approved
of. During a portion of that canvass, one of
my opponents mooted what I may call the
smaller Confederation—that is, the Confederation of the two parts of Canada, and the
people rejected and scouted it, while approving of the larger one. (Hear.) I went
on
to say, with respect to the proposed change
in the constitution of this House, that I did
not look upon it as a disfranchisement of the
electors, although the nominative was to be
substituted for the elective principle, because
while the nomination was not to be made by
the people directly, it was to be made on the
recommendation of their representatives in
the other House of Parliament,—in fact in a
manner analogous to the mode adopted for
selecting the Senate of the United States- two senators being elected by the Legislature
of each state. In our case the monarchical principle was strictly preserved,
and the Legislative Council was to be appointed by the Crown, on the advice of the
Government of the day. If I viewed it as a
measure of disfranchisement, then, looking
at my obligation to maintain the franchise of
the peeple, I should have more hesitation in
voting for it. An hon. gentleman has said
that the change, from the nominative to the
elective plan, was made at the demand of
the people. That assertion is not historically correct; it is not correct as far as
Upper
Canada is concerned, and I think not with
respect to Lower Canada either. There was,
at one time, a desire in Lower Canada, for
the election of its legislative councillors,
but the public men who carried out the
change, did so more out of respect to the
traditions of the country than from any
pressure that existed then. In Upper Canada, I am quite sure, that so far from the
people desiring it, they were either lukewarm
or opposed to it. The liberal and reform
party of Upper Canada were all opposed to
it. It is well known that the late Hon.
ROBERT BALDWIN, so many years the leader
of that party, was always opposed to the
change. And it is also well known, that the
hon. gentleman who is and has been for years
the leader of that party, and who now holds in
the Government the position of the President
of the Council (Hon. Mr. BROWN), opposed
the change to the very last wherever his influence extended, in the press which he
controlled, and in his place in Parliament I
myself saw him stand up to vote against the
third reading of the bill . It cannot, therefore, be said that the alteration was
made at
the earnest desire of the people. (Hear,
hear.) I went on further, and stated that I
looked on the measure as one which did not
admit of amendment, since if we were to
amend it, there were nine other houses
which might claim the right to do the same, Â
and it could, perhaps, never be carried out.
I then expressed approval of the financial
arrangements contemplated, and differed from
my hon. friend from Port Hope (Hon. Mr.
SEYMOUR), who said the revenues of the provinces in past times should have been made
the basis on which they should bring their
debts into the Confederation. Inasmuch as
we are not to continue separate provinces,
and not to contribute separate revenues to
the treasury, but are to be subject to the
same imposts and to have one tariff a
capitation basis is the proper one, and not
that desired by my hon. friend. (Hear.) I
went on to say that the trifling amount to
be paid to New Brunswick by the Confederation, for ten years, was necessary under
the
circumstances, and ought not to be allowed
to weigh for one moment against the benefits
to be derived from the proposed arrangement.
The hon. gentleman from Niagara (Hon.
150
Mr. CURRIE) said our expenditure would
be greatly increased. I said that would depend upon ourselves, for we should continue
to have the management of our own affairs,
and the economy with which they are conducted will depend upon those who administer
them. If great improvements are carried out—if the Intercolonial Railway is
built, and our canals enlarged—if harbors are
constructed on Lake Huron, as they must be- and if further aid should be granted
to extend a railway to those harbors —if all this
is done, it will be impossible to effect it and
not increase our present expenditure—but
these improvements will be amongst ourselves in Canada, and we shall enjoy the benefits
they will confer; and Canada, it should
be remembered, will have a just voice in the
Confederate Legislature. I myself hope
these great improvements will be carried
on in the west, simultaneously with the
Intercolonial Railway, although this is the
only one specifically referred to in the resolutions—the enlargement of the canals
being
only spoken of generally. The Intercolonial
Railway, hon. gentlemen, must be constructed if we have Confederation ; but I hope
western improvements will be carried on at
the same time. (Hear, hear.) I think,
honorable gentlemen, we should be governed
in our votes by the consideration of the effect
of this measure upon the prosperity of the
provinces. If it is to do us good, we should
adopt it without unnecessary delay. What
is it that we expect? Have we not reason
to believe that it will settle the sectional
difficulties which have so long agitated and
distracted the country? Will it not be the
means of extending our influence over a
large and most valuable territory? Will it
not open the way for us to two of the finest
harbors on the Atlantic—St. John and Halifax? Will it not give us access to the ocean
at all seasons of the year? Will it not open
to us the coal fields of the Lower Provinces?
Will it not add nearly another million to our
present population, and place under one government our millions of souls? (Hear.)
But if the measure fails, what will our position be? I believe that our position in
Upper Canada would be one of hopelessness, one
bordering on despair—with none of the
questions settled that have been agitating us,
and which have checked the progress of the
country; with representation by population
not granted, and no prospect of it being
granted for a long time to come, while the
agitation for it could not possibly cease until
it was granted. (Hear, hear.) Furthermore, hon. gentlemen, you all know the influence
that the agreement arrived at in the
Conference had upon our credit in England ;
that it had the effect of raising the price
of our securities 15 to 17 per cent. But
if we fail to agree upon the measure here
in Parliament, what will be the effect in
Britain? Would there not be a feeling
of disappointment—would not our friends
there almost despair of our ever placing ourselves in a position to carry on our affairs
with credit, and acting for ourselves in a
statesmanlike way? Some hon. gentlemen
speak of dreading to take the responsibility
of a vote on a question which is to make a
change in the constitution of this House,
without consulting the people. Why! what
are we here for if it is not to take responsibility? The people send us here for that
purpose, to act as we think best upon all
measures that may be presented to us. But
under existing circumstances, I think the
responsibility of postponing the adoption of
the scheme, of putting Confederation off, is
very much greater than the responsibility of
sanctioning it. (Hear, hear.) I cannot help
thinking that if we postpone the measure- and to adopt any amendment would have
the effect of postponing it, and perhaps, of
losing Confederation for ever—our conduct
will be considered extremely factious and
unpatriotic. A good deal has been said
about a possible dead-lock between this
House and the other House, but there has
been little of that in past times, and nothing
of a serious nature. If, however, the amendment passes, I can imagine a dead-lock
which
might be extremely prejudicial to this House
—prejudicial to its influence in the country;
nay, almost destructive of it. Suppose these
resolutions to be carried in the other House
by a large majority, which I have little doubt
will be the case, and we carry an amendment
here—suppose all the legislatures of the
Lower Provinces adopt the resolutions, and
this House stands alone in rejecting them- do you believe the British Parliament
will
be turned aside from what it believes to
be the best interests of British America
by the action of this House? I can
imagine a dead-lock occurring then, and
one in consequence of which the opinion of this House might be set aside
and its vote disregarded. Until this measure is carried out it is impossible the
151
defences of the country can be properly
attended to, while all must admit it is most
important they should be proceeded with.
Is it patriotic, honorable gentlemen, in the
presence of such a state of things, and in view
of circumstances which all thinking men
admit to be most serious, is it wise to delay
unnecessarily the passing of these resolutions? Honorable gentlemen may feel that
they do not meet the views of every one in
all particulars, but they must see the beneficial tendency of the whole, and they
cannot
fail to see the importance of getting them
passed without delay, for if they are to
receive the sanction of the Imperial Parliament at its next session, there is no time
to
be lost (Hear, hear.) One honorable
gentleman as said the people are not
satisfied with the measure. I believe
they are perfectly satisfied. It has been
before them for a long time, and they are
possessed of suflicient intelligence to have
made their disapprobation known if it was
felt. But, to shew the feeling in reference
to the matter, I will read two or three extracts
from a report which I received this morning
of the proceedings of the Counties Council
of York and Peel. These counties send four
representatives to the other House of Parliament, and they comprise portions of three
of
the divisions represented in this ChamberMidland, Peel and York. Mr. GRAHAM, a
member of the council, moved that a select
committee be appointed to draft a petition to
the Legislature as to the advisability of the
people being consulted before the scheme of
Confederation should be carried into effect.
I will now read from the report :-
Mr. GRAHAM, Vaughan, argued that he did not
introduce the resolution with any such intention,
for he did not regard it as political. The Administration was composed of men of different
shades
of politics, and hence the question was not one of
my particular party. The present Parliament
was not elected to consider this question, and
should therefore not pronounce on the scheme
without first consulting the people. On questions
of far less interest they gone to the country,
and he thought they should on this, as it involved
large interests, and was of the greatest importance.
The Attorney General had said, in his place in
Parliament, that the scheme must be adopted
without any amendmcnts, but he (Mr. GRAHAM)
thought it needed amendment so far as the peeple
of' Upper Canada were concerned.
Mr. HARTLEY said the whole scheme was now
before the country, and the people who were interested in the matter were aware of
its provisions.
In the very riding represented in part by the very
mover of the resolution the people gave expression in favor of Confederation by the
election. of
the Hon. W. P. HOWLAND ; and in fact at every
election held since the scheme was proposed, the
candidates elected have declared in its favor.
He considered the Attorney General perfectly
right in declaring that the resolutions must pass
without amendment. The measure, as it stood,
had received the sanction of all the delegates
representing.
Mr. GRAHAM, Gore, stated that some ot the
members looked upon the resolution as being of a
political character. However, be that as it may,
the resolution was now before the chair, and had
to be disposed of. He thought the question of
Confederation was in the hands of the best judges,
and they would decide whether it would be advantageous to Canada or not. These representatives
of the people were all well posted up in the resources of the provinces, an how such
could be
best deveIoped and therefore he thought that the
question should be left with them for decision.
As to an appeal to the people, he could not see
what good results would flow from it. The resolutions passed at the Quebec Conference
on Confederation were before the people and their representatives, and it is for the
latter to decide for or
against them ; and they are undoubtedly in a
good position to form correct conclusions concerning them. He could not see what reasons
the
statesmen of Canada would have in sacrificing the
interests of our country. They all had a common
interest with ourselves, and hence would not be
likely to do anything detrimental to the best interests of Canada. As regarded the
submitting
of the question to the people, Mr. GRAHAM thought
that ample time had been given the representatives
during the recess, to ascertain the feelings of the
people on the subject, and that, therefore, they
went to Quebec perfectly prepared to deal with
the question without putting the country to the
expense of a general election. An appeal to the
peop1e would be a useless expenditure, and,
therefore, he would oppose the resolution.
On being put to the council, the motion was
lost on the vote of 6 to 25.
This, honorable gentlemen, is the opinion
of the Municipal Council of York and Peel,
and I hope this House will do as that council desire, and decide upon the measure
without resorting to any course that can produce any delay whatever. (Hear, hear.)
So important is this scheme considered in
England, as well as in our own country, that
I believe the vote taken on it will be regarded
as a test of our desire to remain in connection
with the British Empire, to maintain our
allegiance to our beloved Sovereign, or of
our indifference to the prospect of being
merged into another country. This might be
an unjust conclusion to arrive at, but we
have recent examples in our own history of
152
the way such conclusions are formed abroad.
I remember a vote which was misconstrued,
much to the prejudice of this country—I
refer to that on the Militia Bill rejected in
1862. There is no doubt the rejection of
that bill gave rise to the opinion which prevails in England—and you cannot convince
the people there to the contrary—that Canadians are unwilling to defend themselves.
Nothing could be more unjust to our people
than to entertain such an idea, nothing
more unjust even to the majority who voted
against that bill ; but still that was the conviction arrived at, which it took a
long time
to modify, and which is not entirely removed
to this day. I believe that vote has cost the
country a very large sum of money in various
ways. (Hear, hear.) In conclusion, let me
just say that we cannot remain any longer as
we are; we have to advance in some direction, and I believe we are going in the right
direction when we proceed towards Confederation. I am very much disposed to agree
with the honorable and gallant Premier, that
we are on the top of an inclined plane, and
that if we do not adopt Confederation, we
shall very likely find ourselves descending it
against our wish, and plunged into a malstrom of debt, democracy and demagogism.
(Hear, hear.)
HON. MR. BOULTON said he rejoiced to
find, in the accession to the House of the honorable member who had just spoken, a
gentleman so well calculated to sustain its credit,
and to assist by his enlightened and thoroughly
patriotic views in the disposal of the many
and important questions with which it had to
deal, in a manner worthy of the House and
beneficial to the country. With respect to the
measure in debate, he must state he was delighted at the principles it embodied. He
was strongly in its favor, and so far from regarding it as imperilling the interests
of the
province, thought it eminently adapted to
advance its prosperity and welfare. He was
not a young man, having numbered more than
half a century of years, during the greater
part of which period he had filled a seat in
either one or the other of the Houses of Parliament, but he had never yet known a
measure of equal importance brought under discussion. He might possibly not live to
see it
carried, but hoped and expected he would, and
if it were, he had no doubt it would realize
all the anticipations of its framers, and issue
in the greatest advantages not to the colonies
alone, but to the Mother Country likewise.
During the time he had been in Parliament he
could safely say he had been guided by an
earnest purpose to vote rightly, but yet he had
two or three votes to regret, and that which
he most regretted, was the one he gave against
the union of Upper and Lower Canada. In
this he felt now, as he had felt before, that he
was wrong, but his consolation was that he
had acted independently and conscientiously,
not allowing himself to swerve from what he
regarded as his duty even by the earnest entreaties of one of his most valued friends,
the
then Attorney General for Upper Canada, who
had taken a different view of the case. He
now recognized the wisdom of the measure,
and was glad his fears had been disappointed,
and that great benefits had resulted from it to
both sections. He viewed the union now proposed as fraught with the largest advantages
to all the British North American Provinces,
and believed his anticipations would be realised. He had often crossed the Atlantic
and
travelled extensively in England and the United
States, but it was not until last summer, as he
acknowledged with shame, that he had paid a
visit to the Lower Provinces, now proposed to
be united with Canada. This ignorance of sister
colonies so near to our own country, he thought,
was not creditable to any legislator, and he
hoped other honorable members would feel it
their duty to acquire for themselves information which was so necessary to their position.
Well, he had been there last summer, and his
opinions respecting those countries had immediately undergone a very sensible change.
He
had not expected to see such a beautiful city
as St. John, N. B., or such a place as Halifax. He had conceived the people as poor
and struggling for existence, but was delighted
to find merchants doing a great business, and
exhibiting as high a standing and as much
enterprise as any in Canada. Then, these
provinces were distinguished by the most devoted attachment to the British Empire
and
loyalty to the British Crown, sentiments which
he was unfeignedly delighted to observe. He
hoped these sentiments would continue to prevail and even be strengthened by the Confederation
now contemplated. (Hear, hear.) When
he represented a constituency in Upper Canada and had to seek reëlection, he had always
hung out his flag with "British supremacy"
inscribed thereon — (hear, hear,) — and he
hoped that the sentiment would continue to
be cherished in the country so long as he
lived. As to the allegations of some honorable
members that the people were ignorant as to
the merits of the measure proposed, he could
say that, so far as the locality from which h
153
came was concerned, it was a serious error. It
had engaged the attention of the people more
or less for many years, and especially of late.
After alluding to the favorable consideration
of a Confederation of the British North
American Provinces by many distinguishedÂ
British statesmen, such as the late Earl of
DURHAM and the late Sir WILMONT HORTON,
formerly Under Secretary of State, many
years ago, the hon. gentleman spoke of the
opinion of a particular friend of his own, a
distinguished member of the other House, Mr.
MORRIS, son of the late Hon. WM. MORRIS,
with whom he (Honorable Mr. BOULTON) had
had the pleasure of acting for many years in
the House of Assembly of Upper Canada.
Mr. MORRIS, the present member for South
Lanark, in a pamphlet published by him, in
1858, expressed himself clearly and distinctly
in favor of the union of the British North
American Provinces, and in that pamphlet
quoted the views of the present American
Secretary of State, Mr. SEWARD, and which he
Hon. Mr. BOULTON) read as follows. Mr.
MORRIS introduces those views thus :-
That day may be and I trust is far distant, but
sure I am that whatever, in the upheavings of the
old world and the restless whirl of events may betide, yet the connection between
our country and
the parent state will not be rudely severed but
fostered by the power and might of Britain, and,
rising in strength and power, thousands of strong
hands and bold hearts within our borders will
cherish towards Britain sentiments of warm afffection and attached loyalty, and will
be ready, if
need be, in the contests for liberty that may
arise, to stand side by side in the foremost rank
with the armies of Britain.
There is, indeed, vast room for speculation as
to the future of this great British Colonial Empire, and its consideration has engrossed
and is
engrossing the energies of many minds. Amongst
others, hear what Senator SEWARD thinks of us :
" Hitherto, in common with most of my countrymen, as I suppose, I have thought Canada,
or, to
speak more accurately, British America, to be a
mere strip lying north of the United States, easily
detachable from the parent state, but incapable
of sustaining itself, and therefore ultimately, nay
right soon, to be taken on by the Federal union
without materially changing or affecting its own
condition or development. I have dropped the
opinion as a national conceit. I see in British
North America, stretching as it does across the
continent from the shores of Labrador and New
foundland to the Pacific, and occupying a considerable belt of the temperate zone,
traversed
equally with the United States by the lakes, and
enjoying the magnificent shores of the St. Lawrence, with its thousands of islands
in the river
and gulf, a region grand enough for the seat of a
great empire.
Secretary SEWARD (who was known to be
one of the principal men in the American
Government) once regarded this country as a
poor one, but it was clear he no longer thought
so, but had formed a very high opinion of our
resources and capabilities. There was no
doubt that Canada was a great country and
destined to be much greater still, and he held
that if we were true to ourselves we could well
sustain ourselves, especially as in the effort
(if effort ever were needed) we were sure to
enlist the sympathies, cooperation and support of the Empire. (Hear, hear.) Then
he was satisfied that as the project of Confederation was favorably received at home
as
calculated to strengthen our position, we might
expect all the aid that we needed. He regretted not being prepared to support his
views by statistical statements, but other honorable members who were much more competent
than himself, had done so, and no doubt
others would follow. Of this, however, he was
convinced, that we would lose nothing by the
union, but would considerably improve our revenue. The Lower Provinces possessed advantages
which we had not, and among them
their coal and their gold fields might be regarded as of great value. We would soon
require a large and constant supply of coal, a
mineral which, so far, had not been found in
Canada. It was really melancholy that there
should have been so little commercial intercourse between us and those provinces.
They
were constantly needing large supplies of provisions, which we had to sell, and it
was a
pity that the money expended in procuring
them was not paid to us. He hoped that
there would be a great revolution in the state
of things before long, and that we would profit largely by it. In every point of view,
he
conceived this union to be most desirable,
though he must confess he would not desire
to see it carried out if he thought there was
the remotest probability of its leading to a
separation from the Empire. (Hear.) The
Mother Country had done much for us; mistakes had arisen, but, on the whole, we had
been most kindly and generously treated by
her; we had been materially assisted by loans
on the guarantee of the Imperial Government,
and that very fact had greatly enhanced our
credit. In this way it was that our great and
valuable public works had been constructed.
It had often been a matter of surprise to him
that we had shown so little care and anxiety
with regard to our own defence, but the time
had now come when we would be obliged to
do something for ourselves in that direction.
154
The people of England very truly said we had
now grown up so as to be able, to some extent at least, to protect ourselves, and
while
they did not expect us to maintain the whole
struggle unaided, they yet demanded that we
should do our part. This done, according to
the measure of our ability, we would have
nothing to fear, and the union would enable
us to do better than we otherwise could.
There might still be a feeling among a few of
our people in favor of annexation to the
United States, but it was limited to a very
small number indeed, if it existed at all.
(Hear, hear.) Some years back he thought
the feeling prevailed to some extent, but the
unhappy war in the adjoining country had
led to a very great change in this respect.
He deplored that dreadful war, and would
deprecate the possibility of a rupture of our
present peaceful relations with that country.
He hoped we would still continue to live
upon amicable terms, and was convinced
that if war did arise, it would not be provoked by us. They were a great and a
powerful people, and he hoped they would continue in the future to treat us kindly
as they
had done in the past ; but it could not be
denied that of late they had shewn a different
disposition. They had passed a measure to
repeal the Reciprocity Treaty, which had been
of so much advantage to the two countries ;
a repeal which, two or three years ago, they
had no purpose whatever to bring about ; but
he thought a change might yet take place, and
that after all the treaty would not be abolished.
At the same time, if it were abolished, he did
not think we would be ruined altogether, but
expected that intercourse with the Lower Provinces would, in a great degree, make
up the
loss. It might be, however, that we could
yet pass through the States, but if not, and
we were restricted to our own channels of
communication, we must do the best we can.
He trusted the amendment of the honorable
member for Sherbrooke (Hon. MR. SANBORN)
would be voted down, and that the measure as
it was would pass in its integrity. The Constitution of the Federal Legislature had
been
adopted in a council of our leading politicians,
some of whom had all along been opposed to
elective legislative councils, amongst others,
the Honorable President of the Council, (Hon.
GEORGE BROWN). And the people, he verily
believed, did not wish to see the principle
prevail. He had no doubt the Crown would
make wise selections as it had generally done
before, and though mistakes might in some
cases have been made, for his part he was perfectly willing to trust it. He was willing to
give the people all the power they could
reasonably ask, but it was a fact that the power
granted had in many instances been abused.
Many municipalities have been nearly ruined.
They contracted loans, and instead of applying
the money in a way to forward the public
weal, a good deal of it had gone into the
pockets of the borrowers. (Hear, hear.) He
desired to prevent a recurrence of such things.
When the Municipal Loan Fund Bill was
passed, great advantages had been expected
from it, and great improvements had been
projected, some of which, he was free to say,
had been carried out, but some of the municipalities had misapplied and wasted the
money,
and now they were asking the Government
for delay to enable them to pay the interest.
In making these remarks he had no intention
of saying aught that could be disagreeable,
and if he had done so he prayed it might be
overlooked. He had taken an active part in
the legislature, especially in the other branch,
in years gone by, and had always acted independently, and he thought it was the duty
of public men to follow the dictates of their
own convictions in preference to the solicitations of friends. Having done so in the
past,
he would try to do so in the future. He would
close by expressing the hope that the resolutions would pass by a large majority,
as he had
no doubt they would. (Cheers)
HON. MR. AIKINS said :—I do not believe,
honorable gentlemen, that what occurred in
the Counties Council of York and Peel, to
which the honorable member for the Saugeen
Division referred, can bear the interpretation
that honorable gentleman placed upon it.
The honorable member stated that a large
majority in that council had declared themselves unfavorable to an appeal to the people
on the subject now before the House—the
Confederation of the Provinces. Now, I am
personally acquainted with most of the members of that body, and think a fuller reading
of the proceedings to which the honorable
member referred will place the matter in a
different light-
HON. MR. AIKINS—Well, I shall read
it for myself and draw my own conclusions.
[Here the honorable gentleman read the report again, remarking that there was nothing
in the speeches of any of the members of the
Counties Council to show that they were opposed to an appeal to the people, and then
proceeded] :— The members of the Counties
155
Council were not elected on political grounds,
but to administer the affairs of the municipality. Any expression of opinion that
they
may offer on political subjects is therefore but
the expression of their own individual opinions,
and however much it may be entitled to respect
from the character of the gentlemen composing
the council, it can in no way be regarded as
the expression of their constituents' wishes on
the subject. But I contend, moreover, that
the vote in the council was not even an expression of opinion on the part of the members
; for we find from the report that several
members opposed the motion for an appeal to
the people, simply on the ground that the
question was one that ought not to have been
brought before them, it being of a purely political character, and they rejected it
without
expressing any opinion upon its real merits.
Then, combined with them were the gentlemen
who really oppose the appeal to the people,
and of these two classes was the majority composed, of which the honorable gentlemen
spoke
so exultingly. (Hear, hear.) But apart from
the expression of opinion of the Counties
Council referred to, in whatever light it may
be regarded, I object to the resolutions being
submitted to Parliament and pressed upon
the consideration of this House in the same
way as the Address in reply to the Speech
from the Throne. They are said to be passed
or rejected as a whole, without alteration
or amendment, just as if the Government
were bound to stand or fall by the decision.
The Government, it appears, has pledged
itself to the other governments to abide
by these resolutions, and in that case it
should have been a condition that they should
stand or fall with them. Ministers are opposed further to any expression of opinion
on
the contents of these resolutions, other than
what may be stated in the speeches of honorable members ; the resolutions cannot be
changed, modified or amended in any particular, and yet the chambers are asked to
consider them ! What is the use of considering
them if we cannot come to our own conclusions
and give them effect in the shape of amendments ? I stand here as the representative
of, if not one of the largest, at least one of
the most intelligent constituencies in Upper
Canada, and I have no hesitation in saying
the people are generally in favor of the principle of the resolutions ; in other words,
of a
Confederation of Canada and the Lower Provinces, but I do not believe they are in
favor
of all the details of the project. The Honorable Premier, in moving the resolutions,
said
they would be productive of two special advantages to Canada ;—they would give us
strength and durability, and at the same time
settle the difficulties under which the province
has labored for some years. That honorable
member also stated that if this union is not
accomplished there will be a danger of our
being forced by violence into the United
States ; that, if not forced therein by violence,
we will insensibly slide thither ; and that we
are upon an inclined plane which must of
necessity land us there, and whether by violence or by sliding, we must reach that
result.
(Hear, hear.) If the Honorable Premier had
shown that the proposed union would in reality
give us strength, and place us in a position to
improve our defences, then I would admit he
had made a good case. I have anxiously
waited to hear his reasons and explanations,
for I wanted better reasons for adopting the
resolutions than any I was acquainted with.
I am anxious to have them carefully analyzed
and scrutinized, and desire that they may be
found in the interest of Canada. If the
Government, in bringing them down, had
stated that after a thorough canvass and examination, if deemed desirable, they might
be amended in some particulars, I would have
accepted the declaration with satisfaction and
hope ; but no, though allowed to debate them,
we cannot proceed any further. They are
submitted, as I have already said, like an
opening Speech from the Throne, an amendment to which is treated as a motion of want
of confidence, and I can see no great use in
discussing them at all. I desire, however,
prior to the taking of the vote, to know how
much the Intercolonial Railway will cost.
Only a short time ago public opinion in Upper
Canada was adverse to this enterprise, but if
new light has dawned upon the subject, I
would be glad to share in it. I would like to
know also what the route will be, and how
many millions it will cost ; and if it should be
shown that its construction will be a real
advantage to the country, I will be prepared
to go for it. There are other points upon
which I desire information, and one is as to
the proportion of the debt which Upper and
Lower Canada will be called upon respectively
to bear. If the sixty-two and a-half millions
of debt the Confederation is to assume is to
be divided according to the extent of the
two populations, will Lower Canada, over and
above its share, assume the amount paid for
the abolition of the Seigniorial Tenure ? These
questions, in my opinion, need answers before
this scheme is carried.
156
HON. MR. CAMPBELL—There is no
disposition on the part of the Government to
withhold any information the House may
desire to have ;—on the contrary, they are
anxious to afford all in their power,—but the
points suggested by the honorable member are
not yet before the House for discussion. As
to the Seigniorial Tenure debt it will be
assumed entirely by Lower Canada. Then
as to the five millions reserved for a certain
part of the debt, the matter will be disposed
of by a fair division between Upper and Lower
Canada ; and I beg to add that Parliament
will have the opportunity of fully considering
the arrangement which the Government may
propose for that division. An affirmative
proposition will be laid before the House, upon
which members will of course have the opportunity of pronouncing.
HON. MR. AIKINS—I am very much
pleased, indeed, to hear the statement of the
Honorable Commissioner of Crown Lands ;
but I must say I am at a loss to perceive how
we shall have an opportunity of considering
any of these resolutions if we now affirm the
substantive proposition.
HON. MR. CAMPBELL—The opportunity
will be afforded when these five millions of
debt come to be distributed between Upper
and Lower Canada, and when bills or propositions are brought before Parliament for
that
purpose. The intention of the Government
is to offer propositions which it considers fair
to both sections of the country, and it will be
in the power of Parliament, of course, to
speak and decide in regard to the scheme.
HON. MR. AIKINS—I am quite willing
to give the Government credit for sincerity on
this question, but before I am called upon to
vote for Confederation, I would like to know,
and I am sure this House would like to know,
not only how much the Intercolonial Railway
is to cost, but how this amount of debt is to
be diffused or distributed between Upper and
Lower Canada. It does appear to me very
important that we should have all these explanations prior to being called upon to
vote
these resolutions.
HON. MR. CAMPBELL—As to the Intercolonial Railway, the honorable gentleman
will see that it is a matter for the Government
of the Confederation to deal with. The only
question for this House to consider is as to
how the five millions of debt is to be distributed between the two sections, and as
to that
every member will have an opportunity of
assenting to or differing from the proposition
of the Government. The question of the rail
way stands on an entirely different footing,
being for the consideration only of the General Legislature of the union.
HON. MR. AIKINS—I am quite well
aware that the Intercolonial Railway is to be
constructed by the General Government, but
I would like to know now how much it is to
cost. It does appear to me that this is a very
important question, and one that lies at the
root of the whole matter in the minds of many
honorable gentlemen. I know that it affects
me very much. (Hear, hear.) Then, with
regard to the Constitution of this Chamber,
the honorable gentleman who has just taken
his seat (Hon. Mr. BOULTON), and who
comes from Cobourg, has indulged in a general attack upon the elective system, because,
forsooth, several municipalities throughout the
country have borrowed largely from the Loan
Fund, and because the money they so borrowed
has not been properly invested. He argues
from this that the principle of election by the
people should be done away with in this
House. It does appear strange that any hon.
gentlemen should take the narrow and contracted ground that this Chamber should be
appointed by the Crown, because certain loans have not
been properly distributed by municipal bodies
—especially strange that an honorable gentleman should take it who represents a municipality
that is very heavily in arrears to the
Loan Fund.
HON. Ma. BOULTON—I did not allude
to the town of Cobourg at all, but to other
municipalities, where the councils squandered
the money borrowed from the Loan Fund and
put large sums of it into their own pockets.
Cobourg expended the money properly in connection with a great public work, and acted
honestly, uprightly and properly in the matter.
HON. MR. AIKINS—Well, I do not see
why a good thing should be put past the honorable gentleman himself ; and when he
indulges in an attack upon the elective system,
because certain municipalities have failed to
meet their obligations, I do not see why I
should not point out that Cobourg is a defaulter to a large amount. The honorable
member from the Saugeen Division argues
that the appointment of members of this
House by the Crown is not a disfranchisement of the people.
HON. MR. MACPHERSON—The honorable gentleman is mistaken. What I said was
that, inasmuch as the appointments are to be
made in the way that has been described- that is, on the nomination of gentleman re
157presenting the people in the other House—the
change does not amount to a disfranchisement.
(Hear, hear.)
HON. MR. AIKINS—If the honorable gentleman had not been quite so sensitive, I would
have saved him the trouble of making his
explanation.
HON. MR. AIKINS—It certainly is not
my desire to misrepresent the honorable gentleman in any manner. I think the conclusion
one would arrive at, after hearing his
remarks upon the point, is that the people
would still, after this proposed change in the
Constitution, have the power to make appointments to this House.
HON. MR. AIKINS—The honorable gentleman says they will have the power, through
their representatives, to make their appointments. Well, after reading the fourteenth
resolution, it does appear to me that, after the
first election of the Chamber, the people will
have nothing at all to do with it. (Hear,
hear.) The honorable gentleman says, however, that the representatives of the people
will have the power of making these appointments. Who are the representatives of the
people he refers to ? The members of the
Government, who will have this power ; or, in
other words, the Crown will make the appointments.
HON. MR. AIKINS—Yes, undoubtedly ;
but the people, nevertheless, will have nothing
at all to do with the matter ; we advert again,
in fact, to the old principle when the Crown
made all the appointments. (Hear, hear.)
Now, with regard to this question, I feel myself in this position, that although I
may be
in favor of the Crown making these appointments—upon which principle I express no
opinion at this moment—if I voted for these
resolutions I would give a vote, and every
member of this House would give a vote, by
which they would give themselves seats in
this House as long as Providence thought fit
to let them remain. (Hear, hear.) I came
here, honorable gentlemen, to conserve certain
interests, to represent certain classes, and to
reflect the views of those who sent me here so
far as they accorded with my own judgment.
But they did not send me here to change the
Constitution under which I was appointed,
and to sweep away at one dash the privileges
they possess, one of which is, to give a seat in
this House to him in whom they have confidence. It does not appear right to me that
the members of this House should declare,
by their own votes, that we shall remain here
for all time to come. (Hear, hear.) The
reasons given for the proposed change are
various, and to some extent conflicting. We
find one member of the Government telling us
that it is because the Maritime Provinces are
opposed to an elective Chamber, and hence we
in Canada—the largest community and the
most influential—give way to them, and set
aside a principle that was solemnly adopted
here, and so far has worked without prejudice
to our interests. We find another gentleman,
who, when the question came up years ago,
strongly opposed the elective principle, quite
as strongly opposes it now, because since then
certain municipalities have borrowed more
than they are able to pay ! These are somewhat extraordinary reasons, and I trust
the
House will give them their due weight. I
think, honorable gentlemen, that prior to the
proposed change taking place, we ought not
to declare by our own votes that we are entitled to permanent seats in this House,-
without, at any rate, knowing whether the
people consent to it or not ; an I do not think
I am wrong in using this line of argument,
when we have reason to believe that, even if
the Crown-appointed members remain here, a
large number of the elected members will also
remain.
HON. MR. ROSS—How would you act if
you were satisfied that the whole public opinion
was in favor of it ?
HON. MR. AIKINS—I can very easily
answer the honorable gentleman. If did not
and could not reflect the views of my constituents on such an important subject as
this,
there is one thing I could do, return to them
the power they placed in my hands. (Hear,
hear.) That is the course I should feel compelled to take under such circumstances.
(Hear, hear.) With regard to this scheme
altogether, I think that a very great deal
depends upon the resolutions themselves. If
we are to have framed a new Constitution upon
them as a basis, all of them, in my opinion,
should be thoroughly canvassed and examined ;
and this House, as well as the other branch of
the Legislature, ought not to be prevented by
the Government of the day from expressing
its opinions with regard to their merits.
(Hear.) It is said by many honorable gentlemen that the people are in favor of this
scheme.
I think the peope are in favor of a scheme
158
of Confederation, but I think it depends
altogether upon the details of that scheme
whether they will give it their approval or not.
I have no hesitation in declaring what is the
opinion of the people of my division. I meet
and mingle with them almost daily, and have
had ample opportunities of ascertaining their
views and sentiments. I believe that a very
large proportion of them have no fixed and
definite opinions with regard to this scheme.
They are in favor of Confederation, but they
have no definite distinct ideas in regard to the
details of the scheme proposed. If they knew
that their taxation would be largely increased
by it, and that it would add heavily to the
public burdens, they would not support it.
(Hear, hear.) I think, then, that we who are
placed here to conserve and protect the interests of the public, should be extremely
careful and analyse these resolutions thoroughly, and ascertain, as nearly as possible,
what their effect is likely to be, before we take
the responsibility of voting for them. I have
no hesitation in declaring that there never was
a period in the history of Canada when the
people suffered more than they do at present.
(Hear, hear.) In consequence of the personal, municipal and national indebtedness,
the farmers of the country were never placed
in a worse position than that which they now
occupy. (Hear, hear.) When we find that
property has depreciated in value within the
last five years, twenty, thirty, forty, ay, and
even sixty per cent. ; when we find that the
crops of the country have been steadily decreasing in quantity and value within that
period ; when we find that the people are dissatisfied with the manner in which the
country has been governed during the last eight or
ten years ; when we find all this, we may believe that they are prepared to accept
almost
any change that promises a relief from their
present difficulties. But we were placed here
to conserve their interests, to look after their
welfare, and should not hastily adopt any
scheme, proposed by any Government- whether all of one party stripe or not- without
fully examining it and weighing the
results likely to flow from it. (Hear, hear.)
It is said that the public is well acquainted
with the nature of the scheme. I demur to
that statement
in toto. The public is not
acquainted with it in all its bearings, and if
there is one thing I regret, it is this, that it
has not been made a party measure. (Hear,
hear.) I regret this because, although perhaps
no party could have carried it as a party
measure through this Legislature, it would
have been better if proposed as a party
scheme, for then its merits would have been
more thoroughly canvassed and its demerits
more thoroughly exposed. Our public men
would have ranged themselves on either side ;
some would have favored it, and others would
have opposed it ; they would have pointed out
its defects as well as its good points ; the
whole subject would have been fully ventilated, and the result would have been that,
if passed at all, the scheme would have been
as perfect as it was possible to have made it.
But what do you find now ? You scarcely
see a newspaper from one end of the country
to the other that is not full of laudations of
the scheme. And why ? Because the leading
public men of the country have thought proper
to make a fusion ; the leading daily journals on
both sides applaud the step and the scheme
that followed, and the small papers throughout the province, as in duty bound, follow
in their wake.
HON. MR. AIKINS—Public opinion, the
honorable gentleman says. I say that public
opinion has not sufficiently weighed this scheme,
and that we should be influenced here by our
own matured opinion in regard to it. (Hear,
hear.) As I have already stated, I am in
favor of the confederation of these provinces,
framed on a proper basis ; and all I desire is
that we should have the opportunity of examining all these resolutions, and if we
object to
any of them, finding them imperfect or unsuitable, that we should have power to amend
them. (Hear, hear.) So far as the amendment that has been proposed is concerned,
there are portions of it with which I cordially
agree. After it has been thoroughly discussed
I shall, like other honorable members, make
up my mind as to what course I shall pursue
in reference to it. (Hear, hear.)
HON. MR. REESOR—As no one has taken
the floor to continue the debate, I beg to
enquire of the Honorable Commissioner of
Crown Lands why it is that certain export
duties are allowed under this scheme to be
collected by the local governments in New
Brunswick and Nova Scotia, but which in
Canada are collected by the General Government ? It is part of the forty-third resolution,
which reads:—" The local legislatures
shall have power to make laws respecting the
following subjects : Direct taxation, and in
New Brunswick the imposition of duties on
the export of timber, logs, masts, spars, deals
and sawn lumber ; and in Nova Scotia, of
159
coal and other minerals." That, it appears
to me, is leaving very valuable material to be
subject to taxation by these local governments,
for they comprise a very large proportion of
the exports of the country. This is giving a
great preference to the eastern provinces in
regard to powers of taxation. (Hear, hear.)
Then, again, as stated by the President of the
Council, in another place, the sum of $63,000
a year is to be given as a sort of gratuity to
New Brunswick for a period of ten years.
When these things are taken into consideration, certainly it seems that our public
men
representing Canada in the Conference have
gone to work in a rather reckless manner.
They have apparently been regardless of expense on the part of Canada, while particularly
careful to meet every objection to union on
the part of the Lower Provinces. It would
appear that because Canada is the largest
colony, they were willing to grant everything
that the other colonies asked. (Hear, hear.)
It seems extraordinary too that these gentlemen should have passed a scheme binding
the
Government to construct the Intercolonial
Railway without any understanding or knowledge as to what it will cost. (Hear.)
HON. MR. CAMPBELL—It will be somewhat inconvenient for a member of the Government to answer at once
the questions put
by the honorable member, but I have no objection to answer those which he has now
asked. The House understands, of course,
that the Crown lands of the provinces are
retained under the Confederation scheme by
each individual province. It was found necessary that they should be retained in order
to provide each province with the required
funds to carry on the local government. In
the province of New Brunswick the duties
that are levied in Canada as " stumpage dues"
on cutting down timber, are not levied in the
woods but collected at the ports as export
duties, this being in that province a more convenient and less expensive mode of obtaining
revenue from the timber trade. Now, the
honorable gentleman will see that if we do
not allow the Local Government in New
Brunswick to collect these dues in this way,
the revenue which is derived in Canada from
" stumpage dues," would be lost to New
Brunswick. That is the reason why the exception he refers to was made. In the same
way, with reference to Nova Scotia, was allowed the royalty on coal, that is the percentage
of the product of the mines reserved for the
use of the Government, which is collected as a
duty on the export of the article. There also
the export duty is reserved as a source of
revenue to the Local Government, it being
necessary in both cases that they should have
the advantage of their territorial revenue in
the same way as the local governments in
Canada, which will collect the same revenue
in a different way. At the first glance it may
seem that this clause gives especial advantages to the Lower Provinces not conferred
upon the local governments here, but this is
not the case. (Hear, hear.) Then, with regard to the subvention of $63,000 a year
to
New Brunswick for a period of ten years, it
was found necessary because during that time
it would be impossible for New Brunswick
out of its local revenue to carry out the undertakings upon which the province had
entered. The honorable gentleman said, and I
regret to hear the statement, that the representatives of Canada must have been reckless,
and that as the Lower Provinces made demands conditional upon entering the union,
we had to submit with what grace we could.
All I can say is that I wish very heartily that
those gentlemen who thus find fault had been
at the Conference, and then they would have
had an opportunity of judging whether indeed we were reckless or not ; and I must
say to my honorable friend, whom I have had
the pleasure of knowing for some years, that
if he had truly known the representatives of
Canada on that occasion, he would have
spared us to-day the imputation made against
them that they were reckless. (Hear, hear.)
The $63,000 were given to New Brunswick
because it was found that with the local revenue allowed her it would have been impossible
for her to fulfil her engagements. It
would of course have been idle to have gone
into a confederation and find that the revenues
of that colony had been so far ceded to us
that she was unable to meet the obligations
into which she had entered, and that the Confederation would be responsible for the
claims
of her creditors. The engagements into which
she had entered involved a subvention of the
railways of the province. In New Brunswick they thought it better, rather than take
the shares or mortgages of a railway for the
encouragement of railway enterprise, to give a
certain sum at once for railway purposes. Any
company constructing a railway became entitled
to a certain sum per mile out of the public funds.
Thus liabilities were incurred which of course
it was necessary to redeem. Well, New Brunswick having ceded all her ordinary revenues
to the General Government, means had to be
provided by it to enable her to meet these
160
liabilities. And I may say that these railways, which are among the public works
ceded to the General Government, are not
valueless. They yield a revenue to the public exchequer. I do not remember the exact
sum, but it is about $6,000 or $8,000 per
annum.
HON. MR. CURRIE—That is exactly
three-eighths of one per cent. of their cost.
HON. MR. CAMPBELL—Well, I said
they yielded a revenue—I did not say what
proportion it bore to their cost—and when
we give this sum we know, that we are
not entirely without a return for it. Unless we made some provision for this payment
we would have been unable to carry
out the scheme, and there is a fair probability of these works becoming more productive.
Of course, some gentlemen may
say that it was possible to have given the other
provinces equivalents for this expenditure in
New Brunswick, but we all know how unfavorable to our finances has been this system
of equivalents. (Hear, hear.) A similar
sum might have been granted to the other
provinces, but that would have been nothing
but extravagance, which, I am sure, the
country would be slow to sanction, in view of
the past experience in this province in the
system of equivalents. (Hear, hear.) This,
we all felt convinced, was the most economical
and prudent course to have followed in order
to obtain the end of Confederation.
HON. MR. SIMPSON—I would like to ask
the Commissioner of Crown Lands whether,
supposing I sent a vessel from Montreal with
flour to a lower port, and it returned with a
cargo of coal, there would be an export duty
upon it in Nova Scotia ?
HON. MR. CAMPBELL—I am not aware
that there would be, but upon this point I
speak under correction. That is a question
which, if the honorable gentleman desires explicit information, I would like to reserve
for
a future occasion. If questions are put, not
to embarrass the passage of the scheme before
the House, but to elicit information on particular points, I shall prepare myself
to answer
them as fully as possible. (Hear, hear.) I
am sure, however, no honorable gentleman
would put questions with a view of embarrassing the subject, but simply to obtain
information on certain points.
HON. MR. SIMPSON—I have no desire to
ask questions in order to create embarrassment, but this is a question forced upon
me
by the explanations that have been made, and
while I am up I may ask another. I will not
discuss how much Upper Canada gives to the
General Government under this scheme, but
it strikes me as singular that in making these
compensations the Conference gave them all
to the Lower Provinces. Why was not this
money required by New Brunswick raised by
direct taxation, and the colonies thus placed
on an equal footing ? (Hear, hear.)
HON. MR. ROSS—Because the income of
these railways in New Brunswick accrues to
the General Government.
HON. MR. SIMPSON—But they pay
nothing.
HON. MR. ROSS—They do pay something
now, and in future they will pay more. I,
however, speak only from my own individual
point of view, and not from any knowledge
other than that in possession of the House.
HON. MR. SIMPSON—And I speak from
the same, and think the objection I have made
good.
HON. MR. ROSS—As to the export duty
on coal from Nova Scotia, it appears from the
resolutions that the equivalent given to Upper
Canada for this revenue is the duty on Crown
timber.
HON. MR. SIMPSON—Well, what about
the fishery dues given to the Lower Provinces ?
HON. MR. ROSS—We will have that by
and by. I am only answering one question
now. It is in lieu of the duty we levy on
timber, and known as " stumpage dues," that
Nova Scotia is allowed to levy an export duty
on coal. The honorable gentleman shakes his
head, but it is a fact.
HON. MR. SIMPSON—It is not on the
stump that we levy dues, but as the hewn
timber passes through the slides.
HON. MR. ROSS—Well, it is not an export duty at any rate ; but in New Brunswick
it pays a duty when exported, either as saw-
logs or square timber. In both cases it pays
a duty to the Local Government, and it only
seems reasonable that Nova Scotia should enjoy a revenue from her coal wherever it
goes
(Hear, hear.)
HON. MR. MOORE—If the coal were exported to a foreign country, then I could understand why a duty
should be imposed, but
when a ship is laden in one port of the Confederation, with coal, for another port
in the
same country, it does not appear much like a
free Confederation if an export duty is levied
upon the cargo. (Hear, hear.) There would
seem, then, to be a distinction—a preference
for one portion over another—within the
limits of the Confederation. If we are to have
a union, I hope we shall have it in fact and
161
not in name alone. I should like to be fully
informed as to whether an export duty is to
be levied on coal in Nova Scotia, no matter
whether it is intended for another part of the
Confederation or for a foreign country.
HON. MR. CAMPBELL—The royalty collected on coal in Nova Scotia is similar to the
stumpage duty on timber in Canada, which is
paid no matter where the timber is exported
to. It may well be, therefore, that when coal
is exported from Nova Scotia to another province it will contribute to the revenues
of the
Local Government of Nova Scotia. (Hear,
hear.)
HON. MR. REESOR—There are several
other provisions in the proposed Constitution
which seem to be ambiguous in their meaning,
and before discussion upon them it would be
well to have them fully explained. In the
eleventh clause of the twenty-ninth resolution,
for instance, it is declared that the General
Parliament shall have power to make laws
respecting " all such works as shall, although
lying wholly within any province, be specially
declared by the acts authorizing them to be
for the general advantage." It would appear
from this, that works like the Welland canal,
which yield a very large revenue, will be given
over to the General Government ; and this
being the case, surely this is a sufficient set-
off, five times over, for the railways given by
New Brunswick, without the annual subsidy
proposed to be given to that province of
$63,000.
HON. MR. MACPHERSON—The cost of
these works forms part of the public debt of
Canada, which is to be borne in part by the
Lower Provinces under the Confederation.
HON. MR. CAMPBELL—The honorable
gentleman will see that there are some works
which, although local in their geographical
position, are general in their character and
results. Such works become the property
of the General Government. The Welland
canal is one of them, because, although it is
local in its position, it is a work in which
the whole country is interested, as the chief
means of water communication between the
western lakes and the sea. Other works, in
the Lower Provinces, may be of the same
character, and it is not safe to say that because a certain work lies wholly in one
province, it is not to belong to the General Government.
HON. MR. REESOR—I do not object to
the General Government having the control
of these works. It is, I believe, a wise provision to place them under such control.
But
I do say that it is unfair that an express stipulation should be made to pay one province
a
large sum per annum for certain works, while,
at the same time, we throw in our public
works, such as the Welland and St. Lawrence
canals, without any consideration whatever.
This, I think, is paying quite too much for
the whistle. Then the answer of the Commissioner of Crown Lands about the export
duty on minerals in Nova Scotia is not at all
satisfactory. Whatever dues may be levied
on minerals in Canada—and Canada, although
it may contain no coal, is rich in gold, silver,
copper, iron, and other ores—in the shape of
a royalty or otherwise, go to the General
Government, while in Nova Scotia they accrue for the benefit of the Local Government.
HON. MR. REESOR—Well, there is nothing to the contrary in the resolutions, and
you may depend upon it that whatever revenues the General Government may claim,
under the proposed Constitution, will be fully
insisted upon.
HON. MR. CAMPBELL—My honorable
friend, referring a moment ago to the Welland
and other canals, objected to certain works
being considered as belonging to the General
Government, because they are local in their
geographical position.
HON. MR. REESOR—I do not say that
they should not go to the General Government, but what I do say is that they are a
sufficient set-off for the works given by the
Lower Provinces, without paying them a
special sum from the general revenues of
$63,000 per annum.
A Message from the Legislative Assembly
interrupted further discussion upon the subject, and the House afterwards adjourned
without resuming it.
This individual participated in:
