PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
37
MONDAY AFTERNOON, April 18
Committee on despatches resumed.
Hon. Mr. SPEAKER.—Mr. Chairman, since I have had
a seat in this House, many questions of moment have
been introduced and discussed, but although I was a
member of the Legislature at the times when the principles of Responsible Government,
Free Trade, and an Elective Legislative Council were debated, yet the subject on
which we are now engaged, is, in my opinion, of importance paramount to any which
has ever engaged the attention of our local legislature. The question at issue is
briefly, whether we are to have a Legislature of our own,
or whether we shall be absorbed by union with Nova
Scotia and New Brunswick. This is a subject which can
be discussed without party bias, and it is the duty of
every hon. member to give his individual opinion on a
matter of such importance, irrespectively of the obligations which the interests of
political combination in many
cases impose. This question of a union of the Maritime
Colonies is not a new one. In 1814, the father of Her
Majesty, the late Duke of Kent, while Commander-in- Chief of the Province of Nova
Scotia, corresponded on
the subject with Judge Sewell in Canada. The Duke was
of opinion that these Colonies, without a political union,
would never occupy the influential position to which they
were entitled by the elements of material prosperity
which they possessed. It was urged this morning as an
argument in favor of the union, that, in the event of a
cessation of the present civil war in the States, we would
be powerless against a northern army or against the
united forces of the restored union. If that be the only
argument which can be advanced by the advocates of the
suggested, association, their position is weak indeed ; for
I ask, what could the united colonies effect against the
forces which could be brought against them ? Assuming
the population of the Canadas to be two and one-half
millions, and that of the Lower Provinces half a million,
can it be expected that we could, in case of invasion, offer
successful resistance to the disciplined armies which a
population exceeding twenty millions could send forth ?
The minds of hon. members may be seduced from a sober
consideration of this question, by the idea that we would
be laying the foundations of a great country, and I admit
the influence of that feeling on my own mind last Session.
But, Sir, I confess that a change has come o'er the spirit
of my dream. What benefits are we to reap from the
proposed reunion, for we were united up to 1769 ? New
Brunswick has a large funded debt, in comparison to
which our public liabilities, the fruitful subject of so
much grumbling, are mere matter of moonshine. The
public debt of the Island amounts to not more than
£60,000 or £ 70,000, and we have the public domain to
the credit of the country. Although the resolution submitted does not commit this
House to the expression of
any opinion on the subject of the union of the colonies, it
is but right that the delegates, who may be appointed as
the representatives of the Island at the proposed conference,
should have their position fortified by the avowed sentiments of members of the Legislature—that
they should
be able to tell the representatives of the sister colonies
what are the feelings of those whom they represent. I
am decidedly of opinion that we should, as an act of common courtesy, assent to the
appointment of delegates, if
for no other purpose than that of hearing what propositions may be offered by the
representatives of the other
provinces. With this view, I shall support the resolution, but I entertain very decided
objections to the proposed union. In New Brunswick, the Railway barely
supports itself, and earns nothing towards repayment of
the money borrowed for its construction. In looking
over the Journals of the House of Assembly of that Province, I find that its Railway
Debentures require no less
than £58,000 annual interest, to be paid at Baring's in
London. In his speech on the Union of the Lower Colonies, the Hon. Mr. Tupper, Provincial
Secretary of Nova
Scotia, said that the time had not yet arrived for an
union with Canada because of the large debt of that
Colony. " I thank thee, Jew, for teaching me that word, "
for the argument deduced from it, is applicable against
our union with the other colonies. Canada is burdened
with a debt of more than sixty millions of dollars, and
there is an annual deficit in the revenue of a million. As
to the idea attributed to the Imperial Government that
these Colonies are able to bear the burden of defending
themselves against the invasion of a foreign foe, the
sooner Great Britain awakes from that delusion the
better. Our small annual appropriation of £400 for the
volunteer organization is not passed without strong expressions of disapprobation,
while Nova Scotia grants
$20,000 for that service. If we are to have a union, I
should hope that it would be of a Federative, not Legislative, character, so that
we might retain our Local
Legislature, and our people have the management of our
affairs. Our
status, if united, would, I am bound
to assume, be adjusted on the basis, either of territorial area
or numerical ratio of population. If the first criterion be
adopted, we would occupy a very inconsiderable position
in the United Legislature. If our representation is to be
regulated by population, the official statistics on that
point afford but little prospect of Prince Edward Island
exercising much influence in the halls of the United
Colonies. The House of Assembly in Nova Scotis is composed of some 55 members, New
Brunswick has 42 or 43,
and in any political combination of the kind foreshadowed,
we might expect to receive the treatment that Scotland
and Ireland were subjected to when their separate Legislatures were abolished. I own,
Mr. Chairman, to a feeling of surprise when I read the allusion made by the Hon.
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
38
Provincial Secretary of Nova Scotia in the personal
character of the debates in this House, as an argument for
the inference that our union with that Colony and New
Brunswick would tend to elevate the character of our
Legislative discussions. I admit and deplore the frequent introduction of offensive
personalities here ; but I
ask why should we be twitted with such a charge, when
any one who will take the trouble to read the recorded
speeches of Nova Scotian legislators will readily acknowledge that it would be more
becoming in them to
take the beam out of their own eyes, ere they allude to
the more in ours. And in New Brunswick during the
present session, a scene of unparalleled, I might almost
say disgusting personal abuse, occurred on the floor of the
Assembly between the Attorney General and a member
of the House. In view of those facts, it would be as well
if they would confine their imputations of personalities
to themselves. At present, the money that we raise
among ourselves is spent on the Island, and I ask, what
guarantee have we that, once absorbed in the Union, we
may not have to pass a budget framed to meet the railway charges of Nova Scotia and
New Brunswick ? I
know not what may result from this overture, but I
caution hon. members that if they sell their birthright,
they may expect their country to retrograde as Cape
Breton has done since her annexation to Nova Scotia.
We have at present the system of self government and
self taxation, and if there be some defects in the practical
working of our institutions, it is " better to bear the ills
we have, than fly to others that we know not of. " We
have already an independent judiciary, and if our professional men and their clients
should have to appear in
the Great Supreme Court of Acadia, I do not see what
improvement would be effected by the change. At present, we enjoy the advantages of
the Railways in the
neighbouring provinces without the burden of the coal, and
if we were prevented from those advantages, I admit an
argument might be drawn in favor of the Union, but it
should also be borne in mind that the Railway in New
Brunswick derives a large amount of income from this
island. I was surprised at hearing the Hon. Colonial
Secretary this morning when he spoke in terms of disparagement of our legislation.
A reference to our
Statute Book will shew that in many instances we have
led the van of these Colonies in Legislative action. I
will merely refer to our law of evidence, and our Elective
Council Bill as proving the truth of my assertion. And I
cannot think that facts were strong in favor of his statement that our judiciary was
so limited that others than
the judges were frequently called on to preside at the
trials of cases in which the judges, while at the bar, had
been retained as Counsel or Attornies. I know of but
one such case, which was tried at St. Eleanor's two or
three years ago. The hon. Col. Secretary also told us
that our internal communications would be improved by
the increased outlay which the revenue of the united
colonies could afford and that capital would flow in on
us after our separate constitution shall be merged in the
union. As to the first argument, my impression is very
decidedly opposed to it, and I cannot conceive that our
identification with other countries, deeply involved in
debt, will have the effect of inducing men of wealth to
invest their property in the Colony. The statistics of the
Island shew that, without the public lands, which they
possess, without the Imperial Expenditure for naval and
military purposes, which has been so abundantly, nay,
lavishly disbursed in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick,
we have thriven and advanced in material prosperity, as
did the old thirteen Colonies, by our own unaided resources. The very first result
of a union with those
provinces would be a uniform tariff ; and while we hear
complaints of our present scale of duties, let it be remembered that in the neighboring
colonies the people are
taxed far more heavily. In view of all these facts, I
repeat the question, what are we to gain by a union ?
Consider further, Mr. Chairman, the peculiarity which
would necessarily arise from our insular position. All
who hear me know that our Colonial Legislatures meet
in the winter season ; and I ask hon. members, on either
side, if they would fancy the idea of crossing the Straits
of Northumberland in January or February, to attend to,
their Legislative duties. Sir, I believe that this scheme
has been devised, more in the interests of the ruling
parties in the neighboring colonies, than in regard for
those of the people. The Tilleys and Tuppers would fair
have a wider field for the exercise of their talents and the
extention of their sway, but it is our duty to protect the
rights of those whose representatives we are, and what
public man will not hesitate, ere he votes that our institutions shall become nonentities
? We have been told,
and with truth, that Scotland prospered after, and in
consequence of, her union with England, in 1707. There
might be some cogency in the argument, if, before the
union, she had possessed free institutions ; but such was
not the case, and she benefited by the change, and stands
now among the foremost of civilized nations. The same
remark is applicable, to a great extent, to Ireland, whose
parliament could not levy a tax, until under the law
known as " Poynings, " the proposition received the
previous sanction of the English Cabinet. We all know
that there has been for years an agitation for the repeal
of the union, and we see at this day a people asking for
a restitution of the privileges which we are invited to
surrender. The mode in which the union between Great
Britain and Ireland was carried through the Legislature
of the latter country, I have no hesitation in denouncing
as a gigantic piece of villainy. Millions of British gold
were used in influencing the decisions of the Irish Legislature, in fact, so gross
and patent was the corruption
practised, that the Speaker of the House of Commons acquired the
Soubriquet of " the Undertaker " from his
guaranteeing to the Government a sufficient number of
votes to be obtained at certain prices. Here, thank God,
we have a parliament which is, at all events, pure from
any such taint. The argument, that we shall be materially benefitted by forming a
part of a country which
will count its population by millions, finds no acquiescence
in my mind, when I reflect on what Tell achieved for
Switzerland against the most powerful nation of his time,
and that Greece, under the protection of the leading
nations of Europe has maintained her separate nationality. While the Mother Country
remains true to her
traditions, are we to be coerced by threats of the Stars
and Stripes of the Northern States ? I have no fear that
the Aegis, under which we have hitherto prospered, will
be withdrawn, or that " the meteor flag of England " will
be replaced in those colonies by that of the United States.
Hon. Mr. HENSLEY. - Mr. Chairman, acknowledging
that the resolution does not pledge the House to an approval of an union of the Lower
Provinces, I yet consider
that the range which the debate has taken is within the
legitimate bounds of discussion. Without offering any
observations upon the probable consequences to the Island
of a cessation of the civil war which has so long raged in
the States, I see no special reason to apprehend a successful invasion of the Colony,
by the disengaged forces
of the Republic. That subject, I am, however, willing to
leave to the more qualified judgement of the hon. leader
of the Government and the Speaker, who are both military
men. The extensive land frontier of Canada justified the
Imperial authorities in urging upon its Government the
propriety and necessity of that great dependency taking
measures for its own protection against hostile incursions,
but nothing has yet transpired, as far as my knowledge
extends, which is indicative of any intention on the part
of the Mother Country to abandon her Colonial possessions. The naval power of Great
Britain is our best
protection, and I believe that it would be as available in
our defence as ever. With reference to the suggested
union, I must confess that I cannot foresee the advantages
to be derived from it ; but I think it but reasonable to
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
39
appoint a delegation, if for no other object than a discussion of the question in
all its bearings. I have listened
with pleasure to the able and eloquent remarks of his
Honor the Speaker, and in his sentiments I fully coincide.
The allusion he made to the personalities attributed to
our debates by the Provincial Secretary of Nova Scotia,
was not only justified by facts, but, it appears to me,
came with much propriety from a gentleman holding the
high position of Speaker of this House. Much as I regret
the style which sometimes characterises our discussions
of public measures in our halls of Legislation and the
columns of our press, I yet maintain that we compare
favorably, in this respect with our fellow subjects of the
neighboring Colonies. I cannot but consider that an
almost insuperable objection to the proposed union will
be found in the difficulty of any Island Representatives
attending in the winter season in a Parliament to be convened in either Nova Scotia
or New Brunswick. When
Dr. Tupper, in Nova Scotia, urged that union with Canada
was not desirable, on the ground that his country would
not have an equal number of Representatives in the Legislature, I would have liked
to have asked him whether Nova
Scotia or New Brunswick would be prepared to admit us
to an equal voice in the deliberations of the associate
Lower Colonies. Although the union between Upper
and Lower Canada was arranged on the basis of each
Colony having an equal number of Representatives, it is
now sought by the latter to regulate representation according to population. In view
of this fact, what guarantee have we that, after having cast in our lot with our
neighbors on the principle of numerical equality of representation we may not hereafter
have that principle abrogated ? I see many difficulties of a practical nature in
the way of this projected union, in addition to those
which have been referred to. The rate of taxation would
require to be adjusted with reference to our financial
condition, as distinct from those of the other Provinces.
The holding the winter terms of our Supreme Court would
afford matter for serious consideration, for it could hardly
be expected that the judges should cross the Straits in
an ice boat. While such questions as these are present
to my mind, I still vote for the resolution which has been
submitted, as being so cautiously worded that it commits
members to nothing but the sanction of a delegation by
whom the subject may be discussed, and our ultimate
action can afterwards be had.
Hon. Mr. WARBURTON.—Pleased as I have been, Mr.
Chairman, at hearing the pertinent and lucid observations
which have fallen from the lips of the hon. Sopeaker, I
should have been more gratified if he had announced his
intention of voting against the resolution, as I can see no
necessity of putting the country to the expense of the
proposed delegation. With that limitation, I heartily
endorse every word of his eloquent speech.
Hon. Mr. POPE.—I must say, Mr. Chairman, that the
speech which we have heard from the hon. and learned
speaker does that gentleman great credit, and I feel myself constrained to record
my opinions as being decidedly
opposite to those enunciated by the Hon. Col. Secretary.
Without reviewing the statistics which have been brought
before the Committee, I agree in the opinion that the
appointment of a delegation is but an act of common
courtesy. I cannot but admit the force of the argument
that our isolated situation during the winter months
presents almost insuperable objections to our Legislative
union with the other Colonies. Had we been always
united with them, we might be content to continue the
connection, but, as the case is, we should retain possession of what privileges we
enjoy. It may be said that we
are a small country for the machinery of a separate
government, but we would be in a far inferior position, if
united. If representation is to be based upon the relative
numbers of population, we, with a population of 84,000
would have our influence merged in a union with Nova
Scotia's 300,000 and the 200,000 of New Brunswick.
Both of these colonies are burdened with heavy liabilites
incurred on account of their Railways, the benefits of
which we enjoy without the burden of their cost. As to
the argument that the union would introduce capital into
the Island, I cannot recognize its force. Capitalists will
invest their means in countries which, from the extent of
their geographical area, and the consequent varieties of
resources, offer the amplest fields for investment, and the
brightest prospects of advantageous returns. The principal dependence of the people
of this Island is on agriculture, and no man of realized wealth is likely to invest
it in a country where, for half the year, his attention must
be devoted to keeping himself and his cattle from freezing.
We have resources which, in some respects, render us,
small as is our territorial extent, second to none of our
Sister Colonies ; and if, as has been suggested, the business of shipbuilding should
decline, our fisheries may
justly be regarded as a permanent source of wealth. I
can see no advantage likely to accrue from our union with
Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, or with either of them ;
and it is but right that members should express their
opinions on the subject to be discussed by our delegates,
who, by the express terms of the resolution, are precluded
from pledging the action of the Legislature of the Colony.
If the Capital of the United Provinces were to be fixed in
the Island, there might be some reasons for our advocacy
of a political association ; but as that is not to be expected,
I cannot imagine any benefits we are to receive from the
change in our constitution.
Hon. Mr. LAIRD.—Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my
gratification at what has fallen from the hon. Speaker,
and, for one, I would not object to vote for the appointment of delegates if the representatives
of the three
colonies were to meet in the Island.
Hon. Mr. KELLY.—If I had a thousand votes, I would
give them all in opposition to the resolution. What is
the necessity of appointing gentlemen to consult on the
subject of a union from which we can derive no benefits ?
I heartily concur in the expressions of approval which
have been made of the remarks of the hon. Speaker, and
agree with him in his opposition to the scheme.
Hon. Mr. DAVIES.—Mr. Chairman, this subject of a
union of the Colonies has been matter of speculation
among their public men for several years. While
I have always been of opinion that benefits would
accrue from the union of these Colonies, I readily admit
the force of the argument drawn from the fact that we
derive benefits from the Railways in Nova Scotia and New
Brunswick, without being required to contribute to the
cost of their construction. The proposed amalgamation
would not, as far as I am capable of forming an opinion
on the subject, afford additional protection to the Island
from hostile invasion. While each of the Provinces
referred to is burdened with heavy debts, our compatively trifling liabilities, not
amounting, after crediting
the value of our public lands, to more than about £50,000,
will require careful consideration in any negotiations on
the subject of our union. The people of the Island feel
that our tariff is at present sufficiently heavy for the
resources of the Colony and the means of the inhabitants,
and one serious objection would be removed from my
mind by the proper adjustment of our separate public
debt in any scheme of union. My own opinion is, that a
union is only a question of time—that is must occur
sooner or later. Situate as we are at present, we are
powerless at the Colonial Office on the most important
subject of the Land Question, and it cannot be doubted
that we would occupy a more influential position, if we
formed a part of a great united province. The enlarged
field of subjects of political discussion would elevate the
minds of the people, and extinguish the narrow feelings
which at present embitter the parties into which we are,
and have been, divided. The assimilation of our currency
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
40
be that of the other __ would give an impetus to
trade by facilitating business transactions. It is in the
resolution of hon. members that our possession of a
separate Government has been compared, abroad, to the
placing of a large steam engine into a small canoe, and it
does appear a paltry matter to assemble a legislature,
such as ours, to regulate the disbursement of some £30,000
or £40,000 sterling. The causation of our petty squabbles
will have the effect of inducing many gentlemen of means
to take up their abodes with us, as they formerly did,
and I cannot see how a judiciously framed union can
have the effect of diminishing our resources. At all
events, I think it but right that we should accede to the
invitation to be represented at the proposed conference.
Mr. BRECKEN.–It is so seldom that questions in this House
rise above the influence of mere party interests, that I must express my satisfaction
at the tone and spirit which has characterized this debate. In common with my hon.
colleague, I have
not adopted a decided opinion on the subject, but I agree with
him that it is due to common courtesy that we should appoint
delegates. This subject should be dealt with cautiously, for its
results will affect not ourselves alone, but our childrens' children
for all time; for let it be borne in mind that any steps taken in
the direction of the union, it will be difficult, if not impossible,
to retrace. I listened with pleasure to the remarks of the hon
Speaker, which were worthy of his high position, and the frank
and manly avowal of his change of opinion is ample guarantee of
his sincerity. I have always considered that our institutions
were not permanent, and that opinion is being daily confirmed.
The hon. leader of the Government laid great stress on the
probable result of the armed hordes now engaged in active warfare in the States, being
disengaged by the establishment of
peace in their distracted country. But I cannot see why, if we
owe allegiance to the Crown of Great Britain at present, and as
I presume our union is not intended to dissolve that bond, the
same means of protection will not be still available for us. Admitting and regretting
that our discussions are too often distinguished by offensive personalities, I cannot
assume the benefits
attributed by the leaders of the Government of Nova Scotia to
our union with that Province in the improvement in the character of our debates. Gladly
would I hail the subsidence of the
angry feelings which embitter the relations of our political men
but when the Provincial Secretary of that Colony sees fit to
rebuke us, I answer that he had better look at home–he need
not go from his own country for specimens of gross and undignified language need in
the Legislature and the press of the Colony,
amalgamation with which would, forsooth, purify and exalt the
character of our public discussions. Although, in the event of
the union taking place, we may not be bound in specific terms to
the payment of the heavy debts of the other Colonies, yet the
proceeds of a common tariff would be paid into a common treasury, and we should thus
be, indirectly, contributing to the
payment of the interest on their liabilities. As to the differences
of currency which has been alluded to, that is a matter which
depends on the state of trade more than on legislation. While
my present impressions are adverse to the union, I am in favor
of the appointment of delegates who, I have no doubt, will be
cautious in what they say or do, remembering that this suggested
union will bear a striking analogy to a matrimonial connection,
which, however, pleased the parties may have been with each
other, during their days of single blessedness, in many cases they
find it desirable, but impossible, to dissolve. The report of the
delegates will show what benefits our people are to derive from
the measure, and when that shall have been before us, it will be
time enough to discuss the advisability of our casting in our lot
with our neighbors. The reference made by the hon. Speaker
to the representative basis on which the two Canadas were
united, has great weight in my mind. At the time of the consolidation of that union,
the population of the Lower Provinces
was in excess of that of the Upper– but numerical equality of
representatives was decided on. But now, when the proportion
was reversed, the Upper Canadians are seeking to have the principle of representation
according to population, the Lower
Province objects to this as involving a breach of the conditions
on which the union was formed. At present, we have the
largest representation of any country, with the legislative statistics of which I
am acquainted. We have 1 representative to every
of the population, and, if united, as the scale of representation existing in the
neighboring Provinces, instead of thirty
members in the Assembly, we would not be awarded more than
thirteen. The argument that our comparatively small representation in the United Legislature
could ensure our local interests,
by turning the scale as occasion might require between the
members from New Bruncwick and Nova Scotia, militates
against the principle of union, and would place us in a position
not very dignified. Besides, the similarity and almost identify
of interests of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick would
our shifting position of very little moment to set Legislature
If we were territorially connected with those
Provinces, I would support the union, for although their Railways have imposed heavy
burdens on their resources, still their
people receive vast benefits from, and all the money expanded
on their construction is spent among themselves.
Mr HOWLAN, I cannot conceive, what benefits we are likely
to receive from the political amalgamation of our 80,000 people
with 600,000. We have been ridiculed on account of our inferiority in territorial
area, and amount of population, and I do not
believe that the Union suggested would give any addition to the
rights which we at present possess. It becomes the duty of
any legislature to deliberate seriously are they surrender the
parliament of their country, and the privileges of its people. It
is true, that we do not possess the same amount of talent that is
to be found in the larger population of our sister Colonies, but
I maintain that we are every day manifesting improvement, and
I fail to perceive how Union with Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, will benefit us
in this respect. The first result, say, condition of our Union with these provinces
would probably be a
tariff of 15 per cent, with a Railway tax of 21 in addition.
The practical result of the schema will be simply the extinction
of our Legislature, and of the control of our revenues, and taxation, and in my humble
opinion this is but the first step towards
a general amalgamation of all the North American Colonies, and
I believe that Canada is holding aloof, merely till the Union of
the Lower Provinces shall be consummated. As to the ___
conjured up by the hon leader of the Government, that we might
be subjected to an invasion by 600,000 men, when the civil war
in the States shall cease, I think they would find more alluring
arenas for the gratification of their propensities for ___, than
this little Island affords. If we are not considered worthy of the
protection of the mother country, as provincials, we have nothing
to lose. It has been said that the tariff of the States is the
cause of the war. Such is not the case, for the __ tariff was
enacted under the presidency of Buchanan. The true origin of
the present deplorable struggle is to be found in the initiation
of slavery, and I, for one, hope that the North will wipe out
the foul stain. But, Mr Chairman, to revert to the subject of
the proposed Union, there is a strong argument against it, in the
fact of so many countries trying to regain their lost Constituencies.
Take Ireland, as an instance. Some years ago, when I stood in
its Halls of Legislation once graded by the presence of such men
as Grattan, Curran and others of hsitoric reputation, my
thoughts were indeed melancholy, as I reflected on the altered
features of the scene around me. But I need not travel so far
for an illustration of my argument. Cape Breton lost her separate Constitution, and
in vain has she endeavored to regain
it. The Honorable Colonial Secretary, has pointed our
future prospects in gloomy colours, but he has not shown how
they are to be improved by the Union. We would still retain
our agriculture, and our fisheries. The latter will in a few years
be the greatest source of our prosperity. Already we had every
summer 1200 or 1400 sail carrying away vast amounts of
wealth from our shores to enrich a town built on a barren rock.
Before I sit down, I must allude to the reference made by the
Hon Col. Secretary to the religious ___ existing in our
midst. History will record, and posterity will believe that __
member was the first to throw the ___ of religious __
among a once united people. The hon. member then submitted
the following amendment, which was ___ by the Hon Mr
Warburton :
Resolved, That it is expedient under present circumstances, to
appoint delegates to confer with those who may be appointed by
the Governments of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick for the
purpose of discovering the expediency of a union of the __
Provinces, &c.
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
41
Mr. HOWAT - I have listened to the arguments very ably
put before the Committee, and I must say that my opinions
remain unchanged from what they were last year. I still
hold to the view that it would not be well for us to be unifed
with the larger Provinces. It is ??? should we go into
the union, and find it did not meet our expectations, whether
we could get our independence again. Some appear to think
that union would be the means of allaying the little animosities which exist in our
community. Larger countries do not
seem to be exempt from these more than our own, for I was
just reading the other day of an election in some part of
England, and even there great difficulties were experienced
on this very point ; consequently, I believe it to be a mistaken view that small places
alone are disturbed by such
feelings. In the old country, candidates are sometimes
pelted with brickbats and rotten eggs ; now, Sir, we have
scarcely come to that in our little Colony. Were the Provinces united, they would
each probably require to be
divided into municipalities ; and in electing the officers for
such, the same feelings would likely arise which are complained of at present. I also
believe that in the event of a
union the taxation would be almost doubled. Deciding upon
the seat of Government would likewise be a difficulty ; and
however the question might be settled, we could scarcely expect that the capital would
be on this Island. I am opposed
to union, still I think it would be treating the other Colonies
with sparcely proper courtesy not to accede to the appointment of a delegation.
Mr. MONTGOMERY - I will support the resolution authorizing the appointment of delegates, but only
on condition
that they have no power independent of the Legislature.
They should only, as it were, spy out the land, and report to
this House. It is because the resolution merely contemplates
this that I do not object to it.
Hon. Mr McAULAY read the amendment proposed by Mr
Howlan, and objected to it, because it was so worded as to
say that this House would not agree to union on any terms.
Mr HASLAM. -Mr Chairman, we are only, as it were,
reasoning on the proposal of our sister Colonies—only desiring to obtain information
as to what terms they would agree
to take us into a union, and for this purpose the resolution
is very cautiously worded. The delegates will only be required to meet those appointed
by the other Provinces, listen
to their suggestions, and report again to this Legislature.
When we look at the debt of Nova Scotia end New Brunswick, it appears to me that we
should hesitate before we
enter into a union. Whatever advantage we might gain from
it, it is evident that we could obtain very little more benefit
from their railways than at present. It costs a considerable
sum to convey our mails here in the winter season, an expense which we wold probably
have to still bear though a
union were consummated. We might derive the benefit of
an increase of trade, but this would not amount to much ;
therefore, taking a view of the whole case, I think we ought
to be careful how we act in this matter. As to the religious
bickerings alluded to by former speakers, they have been
got up for a certain purpose, and may not continue for any
length of time. I detest them, and say that they have no
business in the halls of legislation. They are extraneous
matter in this debate, and should not be allowed to weigh
our decisions on this question. I differ with the hon. Col.
Secretary in thinking that a union would increase our
capital. I believe we would still have to depend on our own
resources. We ought to be cautions how we proceed,
but I can see no difficulty in the way of supporting the
resolution proposed by the hon. leader of the Government.
These Colonies are undoubtedly destined to become a great
country ; and should a union, after mature consideration, be
deemed advisable, I would be prepared to fall in with the
movement.
Hon Mr COLES again spoke at considerable length. He
said that be had been listening to the arguments of the
different speakers, and had come to the conclusion that to
authorize the appointment of delegates would be a bogus
affair, as it appeared that not more than one hon. member or
two were at all in favor of union. The hon. Colonial Secretary was the only one who
entirely approved of it. Now,
what end would it serve to appoint delegates if we were de
termined not to enter into a union. It has been argued that
we should send delegates as a matter of courtesy, but this
was too serious a question for more forms. The other Provinces seemed to have resolved
on union whether we want
into it or not, so that means unions we were prepared to go the
whole course. We had better decline to appoint delegates. It
had been stated that a delegation would be the means of obtaining information. This
was a very weak arguement, for
we already know exactly the state of the other Colonies. By
sending delegates, we might be thought to commit ourselves
to union ; he therefore thought it a safer course to support
the amendment proposed by the hon. member for Cascumpeo..
When he (Mr C.) spoke in the morning, he saw no serious objection to the resolution
proposed by the hon. leader of the Government, but then he was not aware that hon.
members were
so unanimously opposed to giving up our Legislature. Our
speeches would probably be referred to, so we might as well
maintain our consistency, and vote against even the appointment of a delegation. Were
it a federal union of the whole
of the Provinces that was proposed, he (Mr C.) would more
readily give it his support.
Hon. Col. GRAY replied, that this morning the hon. member did not seem disposed to make this a party
question ; but
it appeared now that simply because the resolution had been
proposed by himself (Col. Gray) as leader of the Government
- what was his duty to do on account of the communication received from the Government
of Nova Scotia-the hon.
leader of the Opposition did not intend to treat it as an open
question. He had spoken in favor of a federal union of the
Provinces, but this was not the matter before the House.
He had also stated that all hon. members, with one of two
exceptions, were opposed to the proposed union. He (Col. G.)
had not said that he was opposed to the union. If the other
Colonies would agree to build the Provincial Buildings here,
and engage to aid us in abolishing our landlord system, he
might give it his hearty support.
Hon. Mr COLES said a march had been stolen on the Opposition. We were told that it was not a party
question, and
was certainly so understood by the hon. the Speaker this
afternoon when he delivered one of the best speeches ever
given within these walls. The hon. leader of the Government, however, now threw out
the hint to his supporters that
the resolution was brought forward by the Government.
Hon. Mr WHELAN.—Before the question is taken, Mr
Chairman, I will say a few words on the subject; and in
the first place, I have to express my regret at not having
heard the remarks of the hon. Speaker which those more
fortunate than I, have characterised so highly. Before entering upon the discussion
of a question of such pre- eminent
importance, the Government should have given notice of a
particular day to be appropriated to it, and it is amusing to
hear the disclaimer that it 1s to be considered as a Government measure. Never was
a more momentous question submitted to this Legislature; and since the Government
decline
to pledge themselves to it, the sending of a delegation to the
proposed conference is nothing but a farce. I care not for
the nature of the union whether it be Federal or Legislative,
either will be absurd while we remain tied to the apron- strings of our venerable
mother—Great Britain. The time
will come when, as foreshadowed by the statesmen and politicians of Britain, the Colonies
will be cast off; and when
that time shall arrive, they may with far more propriety
than at present discuss the principle and details of a union,
either Federal or Legislative. The anticipated invasion of
hordes of hostile Marauders from the States is not likely to
occur; but if it should take place, the people of Great Britain,
not of this Island, would be responsible for it -and we would
not be under the necessity of sacrificing our blood and our
treasure in a vain endeavor in a struggle which we had no
part in creating. The opinion that it would be advantageous
to separate the connection which binds the Colonies to the
Mother Countly is gaining ground in Britain, and if it
should assume a practical shape, we would be as well off in
our separate condition as we would be us a member of a
Confederacy with the neighboring Provinces. These Colonies are as old as, some older,
than were the thirteen which,
in 1775, revolted from Great Britain ; but are we as prosperous as they? Is this lsland
in wealth equal to the little
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
42
State of Rhode Island! Are these maritime Colonies as advanced as any of the states
to which I have referred! The
answer is obvious, and equally so is the reason-it is to be
found in our dependent position. It is simply a scheme
mockery for us to go through the farce of phasing through
the Legislature acts, the face of which meet the announced to
us by the Colonial Minister after the laps of some 8 or 9
Months. [illegible] particular instances to prove the
truth of my assertion, they are too numerous and too well
Known to hon. members on either side of the House to require specific mention. If
our Legislative and Constitutional
privileges were as free and unrestrained in operation as
those of Rhode Island, we would not be waking months in
distracting matters which are more appropriate subjects for
The deliberations of the Court of Quarter Session or a Vestry.
If the proposed union would give us so much influence as to
leave our Legislative action unfettered by the underhand
intrigues and influence of the proprietors as the Colonial
Office, I would support it; for here, with an Assembly of 60,
and a Legislative Council of 17 members, any of our proceedings can be set at naught
by the Colonial Minister for
the time being, who knows nothing of the Colony. The
present position of our legislature, representing but some
80,000 people, is powerless against the secret influence of
the proprietors at the Colonial Office. The style of the
remarks of the hon. Colonial Secretary earns from me no
tribune of respect for his sincerity, for he has not openly
advocated a policy or necessity of a union; he knows
full well that if we were merged in a large united Province,
his occupation of stirring of religious opposition as a means
of acquiring political power, would be, like that of Othello,,
gone. The area of the British North American Colonies
exceeds that of the United States, and we are, as far as
resources are concerned, more advantageously situated to
carry on Government than were the old Colonies at the time
of the revolution. The imports and exports far exceeded those
of the latter, when they asserted their independence and 1776.
While our present relation to the Imperial Government subsists, any union would place
of us in a position similar to that
of Ireland and Cape Breton. Previously to 1772, Ireland
had her own King, Lords and Commons -her commerce increased, and it until her Legislature
was corrupted, her prosperity was steadily advancing. The Colonial Office acts
towards us on the presumption that the Island is under the
absolute control of the proprietors, and the idea of Georgetown, Summerside, or St.
Eleanor's, being independent of
our legislative control is not more absurd than the supposition That we will be allowed
the reality of representative
institutions, while in our isolated condition we are bound by
the data of a Colonial Minister, in whose appointment we
have no voice, and who can treat our remonstrances with
disdain. Without subjecting myself to the charge of disloyalty, (for I wish to continue
the connection with the
brightest crown which ever graced the brow of the monarch)
I repeat, that while the price of irresponsible interference in
our affairs is continued, annexation to any foreign power
would be preferable to the insulting mockery by which the
people of this Island, slaves to Sir Samuel Cunard and others
of the proprietors, are told that they have the right of self- government. If the
truth of my assertion is disputed, I ask
any hon. member, it he will tell the country that our Legislation use a operative
to settle the main question within the
consent of the gentleman I am named. The resolution
would not be so objectionable, to my mind, if it embodied an
expression of opinion for or against the union: but the Government, I believe, are
disposed to amuse the people and
provide, at the public expense, a pleasure trip for some of
their friends, as was the case last year. As to the exemption
of the Island from the Railway debts of the Sister Colonies,
in common fairness, it should be borne in mind that the
Island to rise great benefit from them, and that it is not
unreasonable that an honest acknowledgment of that fact
should be made.
The question was then put on Mr. Howlan's amendment,
which was lost, and the original resolution carried. When the
House resumed, and the Speaker put the question on the main
resolution, Mr. Howlan again moved his amendment, and the
House divided as follows :
For the amendment - Messrs. Howlan, Sutherland, Sinclair
Conroy, Hons. Kelly. Thornton, Whelan, Cole, Warburton, - 9.
For the resolution - Hon . Col. Gray, Col. Secretary, J. C.
Pope, Longworth, Laird, [illegible], Davies, [illegible]
[illegible], Montgomery, Haslam, Ramsay, Mc[illegible], J.
Y.,, [illegible], - 18.
So the resolution was carried, and after the transaction of a
little routine business the House was adjourned.
This individual participated in:
