PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
4
THURSDAY, March 2.
DEBATE ON THE ADDRESS IN ANSWER TO HIS
EXCELLENCY'S SPEECH.
On motion of Mr. Brecken the House went into the order
of the day, vir; Committee of the whole on the Draft Address
in answer to His Excellency's speech. Mr Yeo in the chair,
The Chairman first read the whole Draft Address, which is
as follows:
To His Excellency George Dundas, Esquire, Lieutenant
Governor and Commander in - Chief in and over Her
Majesty's Island Prince Edward and the Territories
thereunto belonging, Chancellor, Vice Admiral, and
Ordinary of the same, etc, etc,
3. We thank your Excellency for having, in compliance
with the Resolution passed last Session, appointed Delegates
to confer with Delegates appointed by the Governments of
Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, respectively, for the purpose of discussing the expediency
of a Legislative Union of
the Maritime Provinces, and we shall be happy to receive the
Correspondence on this subject, together with the Report of
the Delegates.
4. We shall be pleased to learn the origin of the second
Conference held at Quebec to consider the wider question of
general Union of the British North American Provinces, to
attend which, your Excellency, on the invitation of the
Governor General, appointed Delegates selected, as were the
Delegates to the former Conference, from each of the political
parties in the legislature.
5. We beg to assure Your Excellency that we shall not
fail to give your earnest consideration to the Resolutions
adopted at the Quebec Conference, upon the mementous support of a General Union of
the Provinces, and also to the
Despatches from Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State
or the Colonial Department, relative thereto.
The first four paragraphs of the Address having been again
read, were agreed to without discussion. When the adoption of
the 5th paragraph was moved,
Hon Mr Coles addressed the
Committee to the following effect:
There is no doubt. Mr Chairman, that this House will give due
attention to the subject of the paragraph which has just been
readand 1 wish that the Government had done likewise. They
have received the Report of the Conference held at Quebec, and,
that being the case, they should have met the Legislature with a
decided declaration of opinion on the  subject of the Union of the
Colonies. On a question of such importance—the most momentous that ever was submitted
to the consideration of the Legislature of the Island—a question involving the interests
of all the
North American Colonies—l assert that the Government should
have given  a decided expression of opinion, and l am sorry that
they have not taken the responsibility of declaring their policy ;
instead of doing so, they have brought, the subject before us as
bring non political. While I admire the man who maintains an
opinion of his own, and admit that in political parties, the
several members must often yield their individual views, yet,
when a great general principle is involved, as in the present
question, the people have the right to know what are the opinions
of the Government which they placed in power. When that
supporter of the Conservative party in England, Sir Robert
Peel differed from his colleagues on a great public question, he
took his own ground, and was respected by men of all parties for
his independent spirit. It may be said that under this scheme of
Confederation, the principles of Responsible Government are
maintained, but the people will view it with caution if not satisfied with the terms
One gentleman has published the statement
that a majority) of the Government is opposed to the Union; but
if that be a faithful expression of opinion, their acts are incon—
sistent with it ; no Government taken its opponents into its
confidence. In New Brunswick a member of the Executive
resigned his seat and office, Â Â rather than remain to listen to the
plans of a policy he did not agree with. We have a similar case
nearer home and no man of honor will consent to act as a spy.
Here we have the Government putting into the situation fo their
only legal adviser a red hot opponent. I mean to convey no
imputation on that gentleman; but I blame the Government for
professing one set of opinions and appointing to so important an
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
5
office a gentleman who entertains views entirely opposite. The
Government are playing fast and and loose, and are not agreed
among themselves on this great question. The other day the
leader had several teams employed in removmg a building which
they did by pulling together ; but had he set them to
work in opposite directions he would have failed in his object.
This is like the position of the Government, and this is what I
disapprove of. If the members of Government are not a party
entertaining the same political views, in what position are we
placed ? If the majority of the Council are opposed to this
measure, they have to trust to their opponents in the House, the
Col. Secretary and the Solicitor General, if the latter be reelected, to carry out
their views. I, for one, have no confidence
in the non-departmental system, and these gentlemen are the
only officials here. Last year the Government treated this subject very cautiously,
the then Leader asserting that the duty of
the delegates was but to report the proceedings of the Convention.
I myself said that the Union would be no benefit to the people of
the Island, and voted against the delegation. But the question
now comes up in a new shape. We have a new constitution
signed and approved of by members of the Government, and our
position would have been very different if we had for consideration
merely the report of what had been done. The present position
of the Government is such that it is our duty as representatives
of the people, to express our opinion on their conduct. The fact
that they have an Attorney General who is not a member of the
Executive, and the recent appointment to that body of two
gentlemen of opposite sentiments require that the expression of our
opinions should accompany the paragraph before the Committee,
before it goes forth to the public. We have had so many changes
in the Government of late, that it is hard to say whether it is now
a new Government, or merely the old one with a new head.
Were it based on constitutional principles, it would have been
reconstructed, every member going back to his constituents. It
would have been better if the Government had waited for the
opinion of the Legislature, before filling up the vacancies as they
have done. So much has appeared through the press on the
subject of Confederation, that I shall not occupy the time of the
Committee by harping on it. I will put my opinions on record
by moving a resolution which embodies my views on the policy
of forming a Government, some members of which sanction one
line of policy, and others the reverse. Whoever may be in
power, it is but right that they should shew their colors. I now
move the following amendment :—
"But we regret that your Excellency should have appointed,
as one of your legal advisers, a gentleman, who, as a Delegate,
has declared himself " a red-hot Unionist," upon the terms
agreed on at the Quebec Conference."
Hon. Mr. POPE.—The hon. leader of the Opposition, Mr.
Chairman, must be very eager to show his hostility to the Government when he would
propose such an amendment to the Address
as that which he has just submitted. It has nothing to do with the
real subject before the committee ; the paragraph under consideration does not express
any opinion either in favor of or against
a union of the Colonies. He seems to be in great haste to declare
his opposition to the proposed Confederation, but if he would go and
read his own speech delivered at Ottawa on the question it ought
to bring the blush of shame to his face. He has moved a vote of
want of confidence in the Government, and assigns as his reason
for this procedure that he has heard certain members of the Executive state that they
were in favor of Union. When the Despatches and other papers on the subject are laid
before the House,
and the question comes up in due form, it will be fully dealt with.
If the hon. member, however, wishes an assurance as to the
course the Government will pursue, I can tell him that we have
no intention to force this matter upon the House or people—that
the Government is not in favor of the scheme, and therefore it
was not submitted as a Government measure. When it comes
up properly they will not hesitate to give an expression of opinion on the subject.
The hon. leader of the Opposition may suppose that some of the supporters of the Government
will not
approve of the appointment of one who advocates Union to a seat
in the Executive ; but I can assure hon. members that there is
no disposition on the part of the Government to take advantage
of the country on the question. No decisive action in favor of
Union will be taken until the opinion of the people is obtained at the polls.
Hon. Mr. HENSLEY.—This subject of a Union of the Colonies
being one of the most momentous which has ever come up for
consideration before this House, it does strike me as very
irregular that it has not been made a Government question.
They should, in view of the great interests which it involves,
have come down with a decided policy, instead of a negative one
as they have done. It is impossible to ascertain from the views
of members of the Government expressed outside of this House,
or from the Address before us, what course they intend to pursue.
I have some objection to the resolution proposed by my friend the
hon. leader of the Opposition ; I consider it too personal. I have
nothing against the gentleman alluded to in that resolution on
personal grounds ; on the contrary I have a very high respect for
him. If persons are going to be particularly objected to for their
views, I hold that the hon. member has almost as good a reason
for opposing the Government because the Hon. Colonial Secretary,
who is also an advocate of Union, is allowed to retain his seat at
the Executive board. Before the discussion is over I may submit a resolution, with
no personal allusions, to test the Government on the general question of the proposed
Union of the Colonies.
Hon. Mr. COLES.—I have no personal objections to the gentleman who was the hon. member for Georgetown.
I merely
referred to him, because having declared himself so decidedly in
favor of Union, his appointment might seem to indicate that the
Government were disposed to support the scheme.
Hon. Mr. DAVIES.—It would have been rather a strange
proceeding to have inserted in the address anything decided on
the subject of Union. There is a great difference of opinion on
the question, and it would certainly be premature to pronounce
upon it until all the papers containing information on the subject
are laid before the House. I, for one, am rather in favor of a
Union of the Colonies ; but I am opposed to the terms contained
in the Report of the Quebec Conference. We ought to contribute
towards our defence, and therefore I would not object to the
expense of the proposed Union on this ground ; but it would be
unfair to burden us with the cost of constructing railways and
making canals in Canada, from which we would derive little or no
benefit. When the Despatches on the subject, however, come
down will be the proper time to discuss the merits of the question.
I cannot agree with the hon. leader of the Opposition that we
should have appealed to the people if we could not construct a
Government unanimously opposed to the United Scheme.
Hon. Mr. LONGWORTH.—Before we come to a decision
on the Union question, we should possess full information on the
subject, and from whom can we obtain this information more
saisfactorily than from the Delegates themselves who attended
the Conference ? These hon. gentlemen, however, at this stage
of our proceedings, are not in a position to consistently enter into
explanations on the subject of their deliberations. We therefore
should wait and not come to a vote on this question until the
Report of the Delegation and the correspondence relative thereto
are laid before us. The hon. leader of the Opposition seems to
be desirous of amusing himself, or perhaps feeling the pulse of
his own party by his experimental and rather singular motion ; for
it is evident that he has not consulted his party. One of his
supporters, the hon. and learned member for East Point, is dissatisfied with the resolution
which he has proposed, and intends,
it appears, to submit one himself, expressive of his own views.
The hon. leader of the Opposition censures the Government
because they have not defined their policy and assumed the
responsibility of dictating to the people on this grave and momentous subject, which
affects alike the interests and well being of all
classes, races, and political parties in this Colony. It would, in
my judgement, be premature for the Government of this Island
at this early stage of our proceedings, and before the other Provinces had given their
voice on the subject, to anticipate the
action and decision of those Provinces and to declare their opinion
on the proposed scheme of Confederation. In Nova Scotia, where
every member of the Government is in favor of the measure, they
have not made it a Government question. If this was deemed a
prudent course in Nova Scotia, certainly it would have been
impolitic for the Government of a small Colony like this to have
taken a more decided step. Our proper course is to make the
matter an open question, and thereby allow all parties the opportunity of discussing
the subject freely, and of recording their
opinions upon it according to their unbiased judgement. I, for
one, am determined to do no act to prejudice the constitutional
right of the people to decide on this great question, as I conceive
it to be our duty to return to the people intact the rights and the
constitution with which we were entrusted, and which we were
bound to uphold when we were elected to this House. This is
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
6
my view of the subject, and it has also been ably and well laid
down by the hon leader of the Government, that the people ought
to be consulted before a decision should be givin in favor of the
Union scheme. We have now, however, as a House, no
data to work upon, and therefore I repeat that it would be
premature at present to enter upon a discussion of the subject, or
come to any resolution bearing upon it.
Hon Mr COLES.--This is the very point at which I am
aiming, namely, to draw out an expression of opinion from the
Government. Should a dissolution of the House take place, how
are the people to know what is submitted to them unless the
Government says yea or nay. If I only knew their policy per haps I would give them
my support. It is evading the question
to say that we are not informed on the subject, for almost every
child between Ottawa and Charlottetown knows all about it --
even to nice calculations on the cost of the Intercolonial Railway. The hon member
who last spoke, has, I understand,
declared his views on the Union scheme at a public meeting ;
and after expressing himself as decidedly opposed to it, I am
astonished that he, as a member of the Government, should give
his sanction to the appointment of a gentlemen to be one of his
colleagues, who has announced himself to be a "red-hot
Unionist." I contend that it was the duty of the Government
to declare their principles, and then appeal to the people at once,
and not to wait until the House was in Session some time before
they agreed upon their policy--then perhaps only to put off the
question. In Canada they deemed the matter of such importantance
as to grapple with it at the very opening of the Session. If we
should delay giving a decision upon the question here until the
House dies out, it will not be treating the Canadians fairly, who
are desirous to have the measure carried immediately into effect.
It was the duty of the Government, instead of acting as they have
done, to have aimed at leading public opinion, and then taken
the case to the polls. It is a very easy course for a Government
to pursue, merely to slip along without advancing their views on
questions of the greatest importance to the country. There is
another subject occupying a share of public attention-- a Union
of a different description to that under consideration, which has
been passed over in silence in His Excellency's speech. I
allude to the Tenant Union, and I am partly disposed to censure
the Government for not declaring their sentiments in reference to
this organization, as its principles may have to be tested at the
next general election. But I will not enter into that
subject now. The Government of New Brunswick have
taken decided action on the question of Union ; Hon Mr Tilley
has declared himself in its favor and appealed to the people. If
Confederation be rejected in that Province at the polls, will he
retain office ? No, Mr Chairman, I believe he has too much
principle to attempt anything so unconstitutional. Allusion has
also been made to Nova Scotia ; but from what I know of the
gentlemen who is leader of the Government there, I think it is
not at all probable that he will shirk the question. It will come
up in the Legislature, and if he is unable to carry it I believe he
Â
Hon. Col. GRAY.--Mr. Chairman, I am of opinion that the
conclusion of the hon member's remarks might have been
spared. I would have preferred to have taken no part in this
discussion, but when referred to and misrepresented, I cannot
be silent. Perhaps the hon. member may not be acquainted
with the merits of the case to which he has alluded. Let me,
then, state that the difference between an hon gentleman, not a
member of this House, and myself, was unconnected with the
question of a Union of the Colonies. It was quite a different matter altogether. If
the hon member who has introduced this unpleasant subject would refer to the files
of some of the public journals, he would find the reasons which I assigned for resigning
my
position as president of the Executive Council and as a member
thereof. The case had nothing to do with a Union of the
Colonies. It might have occured in any other circumstances.
It affected myself personally, and also the interests and honor
of the country apart from the question of Union. The hon
leader of the Opposition has referred to two points which though
at first dissevered he has since connected--the subject of a
Union of the Colonies and a Government question respecting an
appointment to office. I am at a loss to understand how the
hon member for the East Point intends to propound his views on the
subject ; perhaps he will present his objections to the Address
in a more connected form. Surely hon members cannot have so
soon forgotten that the Government appointed delegates, according
to the resolution of this House last session, to confer with other
delgates, on the subject of a Union of the Maritime Provinces;
and also at a later date on the invitation of His Lordship the
Governor General, that delegates were appointed to consider
the broader question of a Union of the whole of the Provinces.
This is a matter calculated to effect the interests and welfare
of every subject in British America irrespective of party, race or
faith ; and consequently to divest it as much as possible from a
party question, three members of the Government, three members of the Opposition,
and one independent member of this
House, were appointed to proceed to Quebec as delegates.
This delegation was nominated on precisely the same grounds
as the first was appointed. When the request came from
Canada for this Colony to send delegates to confer on the
question of a Union of the whole of the Provinces, surely it
was not necessary to call the Legislature together to
consider the propriety of acceding to the request. If
this were the case of what use would the Executive be ?
It would, indeed, be a do-nothing Government. There was no
occasion to seek new powers from the Legislature ; the two
delegations were for precisely the same purpose, only the latter
was to consider the subject on a grander scale. The one scheme
was for uniting Provinces comparatively unimportant ; the other
was for consolidating the same Provinces into a confederation
which would form a state as large as the entire Continent of
Europe. If I had thought that this subject was to have been
speaking, for the hon leader of the Opposition, or for the hon
gentleman on his right, the member for St Peter's--as well as
another hon gentleman from the other end of the building who
has generally been opposed to my views--that I should have appointed them on this
delegation ? My friendship for them on
political grounds was not so great that I would have urged their
appointment had I thought that the subject which the delegation
met to consider was to be a question on which an effort would
be made to defeat the Government. I encountered no little
opposition in procuring the appointment of my political opponents ;
but if there be any blame attaching to it, I assume it all. I
believe, however, that there is not a member of this House who
does not appreciate and approve of the motives which influenced
the choice. But Sir, I have recently learned that there are
three great commandments for politicians--of which I was
entirely ignorant when I entered political life. This first of these
is for the politician to take good care of himself and his pocket ;
the second is to crush his enemy ; and the third is to attend to
the good of the country. And, Sir, I fear that the third is sometimes wholly forgotten
in the zeal to carry out the other two.
(Applause.) Acting on these rules, therefore, it is fair game for
the hon leader of the Opposition to endeavor to trip up the
Government on any pretence whatever. I think, however, it
would have been more prudent in him to have deferred bringing
up this question until it came before the House in due form.
The delegates appointed were required to report to the Legislature, which I as their
chairman am prepared to do ; but at this
stage of the proceedings, until this Report can be laid before the
House, it is premature to discuss the subject. At Quebec I
decide ; when I returned here, however, I found the statement
had gone forth--like many more which were untrue--that this
question was to be carried without an appeal to the people. I
immediately wrote a letter to the different newspapers in the
Colony stating some of my views on the subject, and assuring the
people that the measure could not be sanctioned without an
appeal to them. The hon member has referred to the course
pursued by the Government of Nova Scotia on the question.
They have adopted there the plan which I thought we ought to
follow out in this Colony. I understand it is the intention of the
Government of Nova Scotia to submit the Report of the delegates
to the House of Assembly, and if but a majority of that body
were in favour of the scheme, that then there would be an appeal
to the people. I have not consulted with the members of our
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
7
course they purpose to adopt ; but I consider that it is their duty
to submit the Reports to the House, and then will be the time
for this honorable body to deal with them on their merits. The
question has assumed such grave features of late on account of
the action of the Home Government, that it may be necessary to
deal with it in a practical manner. It is difficult to say what
despatches from the Secretary of State for the Colonies may be
laid before us in the course of a month. There are some hon.
members here, doubtless, of far greater political sagacity than I
can pretend to, who will probably enlighten this House on the
best course to pursue in the case. There may be facts connected
with it submitted to our notice of which we are at present uninformed ; so it is impossible
to determine what steps it may be imperative on us to take. If I mistake not His Excellency
stated in his
speech that the papers on the subject will be laid before the House.
It will be time enough then to judge of the matter. As chairman of the delegation
I had my own share of the work to perform,
and I do not desire to be called upon to enter into explanations
until the question is brought up in proper shape. With
reference to the appointment to which the hon leader of the
Opposition objects, I will refrain from making any observations
at present, for it would perhaps necessitate a reference to another
gentleman to whom I do not now wish to allude. I dare say the
Government were actuated by the best possible motives in making
the selection which they did. It is no easy matter, as I can
testify from my experience during the last two years, to procure
able assistants. I suppose the Government would scarcely have
ventured to offer the appointment to the hon member for East
Point, with any hopes of receiving a favorable reply. (Laughter.)
I regard the hon gentleman who has been appointed as every way
well qualified for the situation he has been called upon to fill. I
look upon him, Sir, as the father of this House—but in making
this remark I am not certain that I am doing justice to the hon
member for Cardigan.
Hon Mr COLES.—Nor to one or two others on this side of the
House.
Hon Col GRAY.—Well, I am right in saying that he has been
longer a member than any on the Governmentside of the House.
We are all here, I believe comparatively young members
(laughter.) I am safe in saying, however, that the gentleman
appointed is one well entitled to the confidence of the country
I am not aware, at least, that the Government could have done
better in the selection.
Hon Mr COLES.—I did not censure the Government for appointing delegates, but for saying that they
are opposed to
Confederation, and at the same time appointing a Unionist to a
seat in the Executive.
Hon Mr DAVIES.— It is difficult to tell who is, and who is
not a Unionist in this House. The hon member who last spoke
has, I understand, expressed himself in favor of a Union of the
Colonies. At Ottawa he certainly made a speech approving of
the terms of the Quebec Conference. As this is a question on
which the people have not made up their minds I do not see how
the Government could be expected to lay down any definite
policy in the matter. The hon member for Belfast has set the
case very fairly before the Committee, by stating that the time
to discuss the question is when the Report of the delegates and
the papers connected therewith have been presented to the
House.
Hon. MR COLES.—I cannot allow the statement of the hon
member for Charlottetown to pass uncontradicted, I defy him
or any other person to show that I, in the Conference or any
where else, said that I was in favor of the terms contained in
the Report of the delegates. All I said at Ottawa in favor of
the Report was, that it was creditable to so many men that they
had agreed so well in drawing it up. Hon members may say
that this is not a Government question ; but I am determined to
make it one, so that if it be taken the polls the people may have
the matter fairly before them. Some may be disposed to say
that the terms are not very favorable to this Colony ; but they
have confidence that the gentlemen at Ottawa will do what is
fair. Now, I am of opinion that the people of this Island would
not be satisfied to leave the matter in this way. To have hon
members acting like loose fish on such a question is dangerous.
Had I been desirous to carry my resolution I would have put it
in a different shape altogether. I do not wish them to vote
against their declared principles. I believe the hon member on
my right (hon Mr Whelan) and the late leader of the Govern
ment would vote to have the Report of the delegates confirmed
by the Imperial Government. There are fewer old party ties
to bind us now than formerly. The Land Question appears to
be settled, as it is not referred to in His Excellency's speech
this Session—the first time which it has been omitted for years.
I would perhaps have assisted the Government had they declared their principles. As
it is at present, I do not understand
their policy.
Mr BRECKEN.—I had hoped, Mr Chairman, that this question would have been met in the spirit of
the third of the motives
of politicians mentioned by the hon member for Belfast—that of
the general interests of the country—but, Sir, I now despair of
that, seeing that the hon the leader of the Opposition has expressed his determination
to degrade this high theme to the
level of a mere party question. Never since this Island had a
Legislature, never since the sun of civilization shone upon it,
has a matter of such momentous interest, wherein such great
principles are involved, occupied the attention of its parliament.
The hon leader of the Opposition has talked much about trimming sails to catch the
varying breeze of popular favor, but I
can tell him that the example is better than precept. No one should
regard a question of such magnitude in the light of his own personal interests or
those of his party. Generations yet unborn
are to be affected by the decision of this matter, and it is truly to
be regretted that the hon member has not thought fit to follow
the example adopted by the Legislatures of the other Colonies,
where party spirit has been merged in the treatment of this subject. In Canada we
find gentlemen who had long been bitter
opponents now agreeing as we are told the lion and the lamb
shall do. In Nova Scotia, the leader of the Government and of
the Opposition in the Legislative Council, and in the Assembly
the ex-Attorney General, view this subject only as it regards the
general interests of their country, Such example would not be
without its effect on the hon member. My own opinion is opposed to the contemplated
Union, as I believe that we should
not be as advantageously situated under it as we are at present.
But, Sir, this is not the time to discuss the question, for how can
hon members from opinions on the matter until the information
embodied in the correspondence shall be placed before them ?
I have not sought to know the course the Government may adopt
on this question; but it is no imputation on their courage that
they have not indicated their action in the address.—I think it
would be more prudent to await the action of the other Colonies.
I see by the debates in the Canadian Legislature that this Report of the Conference
is regarded as a treaty. Perhaps that
report may have been assented to by the hon member himself.
There may be possible be another Conference ; if such should be the
case and the hon member should assist at it, I hope he will occupy a more comfortable
position than I fear he does at present.
As one of the seven representatives of this Island, he occupied
at the Quebec Conference a high position, and he had a high and
solemn duty to perform, and he should have discharged it
untrammelled by considerations of mere party. If he was opposed to the Scheme, then
was the time for him to have manifested his independence, and if he considered that
the project
would operate prejudicially to the interests of his country, he
should have stated so. Sir, he should have recollected that it
devolved upon him as a prominent public man of the Island,
delegated to the mission on which he went, on account of his
position, to have asserted and illustrated the reputation of his
country for straightforward honest conduct. If our Island home
be limited in area, if its population be sparse and its people poor
in comparison to our neighbors, these circumstances rendered
more incumbent on those who represented us to show that we
were disposed to act without deception, and not to subject the
Colony of the imputation of a breach of faith with our neighbors.
As to what has been said by the hon member with reference to
the appointment of the Solicitor General it becomes not me,
situated as I am, with reference to that gentleman, to discuss
the subject as fully and freely as I might under other circumstances ; but I do that
the constituency of Georgetown which
he has for years represented, and from whom he seeks a renewed
expression of confidence, is, although comparatively small, as
intelligent as any in the Island. They have had ample opportunities of estimating
his character for veracity, and when he
openly avows his opinions in seeking their suffrages, they are
best qualified to know what amount of credence is to be accorded to him. The hon leader
of the Opposition finds that, the
Land Question having been finally disposed of, no locus standi
is left for him, and consequently he must lower the question of
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
8
the proposed Union to the lowest platform of party. There is
no fear that the Imperial Government will constrain us to the
positive adoption of the Union, and if I supposed that the Government of the Island
would force this measure without the
opinion of the people having been taken upon it, I would vote
for their impeachment. This question involves our political existence, and the principles
for which the oppressed nationalities
of the world have been and are struggling. There is no necessity for haste, if the
other Colonies, Nova Scotia and New
Brunswick, decline to enter into the compact there is an end of
it ; if they shall consent to it , and we be forced to cast in our lot
with them, we shall at least have the satisfaction of knowing
that we have done our duty to our country.
Hon. Mr. COLES.—If we are to wait for the action of the
other Colonies, and to follow in their footsteps, we may as tell
them to send to the Island copies of their proceedings and that
we will adopt them. I repeat that this is a question on which
the Government should declare their policy. In Canada and
the other Colonies it is true that parties formerly opposed to each
other have united on this matter, but it should be remembered,
on the other hand that there has been a combination of men
who formerly took different sides in politics, in oppoisiton to the
scheme. In Canada M. Dorion is not found lying down beside
his former colleague, Mr. Brown. When I say that this is a political question, I do
not mean to assert that the same party ties
which formerly existed must necessarily remain. I object to the
Government expressing themselves as opposed to a question of
such importance as this, and taking into their councils a gentleman who has expressed
himself most warmly in favor of it.
Mr. BRECKEN.—I did not say that I would consent to any
course which Nova Scotia or New Brunswick might adopt. I
stated that it would be advisable to wait until we had ascertained
their views ; and surely the hon. member must admit that if those
Provinces decline to unite their destinies with those of Canada,
there is not much probability that the latter will force Prince
Edward Island into a union with her. I agree with the hon.
member that new political associations have arisen in the other
Colonies on this question. In Canada, Mr. Brown sits beside his
old opponents, Messrs. Cartier and McGee, and a similar fusion of
parties may take place here. Public men have and do change
their views on particular questions, and it may be that the hon.
member himself shall, at some future day, find himself the leader
of a Union party ; and, Sir, such a position would imply no discredit to him, if additional
information should dawn upon his mind.
Hon. Mr. COLES.—With reference to the appointment of the
Solicitor General, my objection is, that if that gentleman be returned to this House,
and the question of Confederation be
brought up during the present Session, he must either vote on it,
against his own convictions, or against the Government of which
he is a member and paid official.
Mr. BRECKEN.—I repeat that if elected on his public
assertion to his constituents that however strong may be the
opinions he entertains on the subject of the contemplated Union,
it is not the intention of the Government which he has joined to
force it upon the people before they shall have had the opportunity of signifying
their wishes on the subject, he can, without the
slightest imputation of inconsistency, sit in the Executive
Council and this House as Solicitor General of his party ; and it
is somewhat inconsistent with the character of a great liberal that
he should advocate the principle of a representative of the people
forcing his opinions upon those who differed from them.
Hon. Col. SECRETARY.—Mr. Chairman, in the absence of
all official information, this discussion is premature and irrelevant. When the proper
time shall have arrived I will be prepared to discuss fully the appointment to which
reference has
been made, and the subject of the Conference at Quebec. The
paragraph before us merely states that we will give due consideration to the correspondence
when it shall have been submitted to us. When that shall have been done, we can, with
propriety, discuss the matter, and not sooner.
Mr. SINCLAIR.—Mr. Chairman, I am of the opinion of those
who believe that the interests of the people are not so safe in the
keeping of a Government in favor of Union as of one opposed to it.
When the hon. member for Charlottetown, Mr. Brecken, says that
this question involves our very political existence, he necessarily
implies that it is pre-eminently a question of a political nature—of
such nature that the Government should express their opinion on
it, and not adopt the hide-and-seek policy which they are
pursuing. The people can form no estimate of the Government,
the acts of which are in opposition to their expressed opinions.
On a question of such mementous importance the people have
the right to the fullest information ; and, Sir, we, the representatives of that people,
find ourselves in a position very different
from that which we occupied last Session when this question
of Union was before us. We now find that instead of the cautious
manner in which this matter was treated by the Government last
year, that they consider themselves justified in acting without
reference to the wishes or opinions of the House. The hon.
leader of the Government ridicules the idea of consulting the
popular branch of the legislature on the propriety or expediency
of the second conference, while we all know that the opinion of
the House last year was almost unanimous in opposition to the
Union of even the Maritime Provinces. It is in the recollection
of hon. members that the House dealt with the subject very
cautiously ; they were particular in limiting the authority of the
delegates who might be appointed by the Government to the
mere preparation and report of the preliminary details of such
scheme as might meet the approval of the assembled representatives of the Lower Provinces.
The following is the resolution
submitted last year by the then leader of the Government :—
" Resolved, That His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor
be authorized to appoint Delegates (not to exceed five) to
confer with Delegates who may be appointed by the governments of Nova Scotia and New
Brunswick for the purpose of
discussing the expediency of a Union of the three provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick
and P. E. Island under
one government and Legislature—the Report of said Delegates to be laid before the
Legislature of this Colony, before
any further action shall be taken in regard to the proposed
question."
And in the speech which that hon. member made on that
occasion he said :—
" Now, Sir, I cannot avoid expressing my opinion that our
neighbors are proceeding too hastily in this matter. I think
the first point to consider is, Shall there be " a preliminary plan ?" Is it advisable
to have a Union at all ? In theÂ
resolution which I have submitted it is proposed to appoint
Delegates, simply for the purpose of discussing the expediency of a union of the three
Provinces of Nova Scotia, New
Brunswick and P. E. Island, under one Government and
Legislature. This is as far as I deem to be prudent for us
to proceed at present."
Now, Sir, I assert that in the action they have taken the
Government have exceeded their authority. They appointed another delegation having
a very different object,
and that delegation instead of merely agreeing to and reporting upon a preliminary
plan, have subscribed and
adopted the details of a constitution so definite as to have
been viewed in the light of a treaty entered into by parties
invested with full powers to bind the countries they
represented; and we may be sure that we shall be reproached as having been guilty
of a breach of faith, if we
do not ratify their proceedings. Our legislative constitution will be a mere farce
if the Government are allowed
to do as they please irrespectively of the formally expressed
opinions of this House. If it is the privilege and the duty
of this House to criticise and pass judgment upon the acts
of the Government, what is the use of calling us together
after our rights have been taken from us by the Government ? The hon. member for Belfast
(Hon. Col. Gray) took
credit to himself for the composition of the Island delegation—that it embraced men
of opposite opinions, gentlemen
selected from each of the political parties in the leislature.
That affords to my mind a very strong argument in favor
of cautious deliberation, for there is always cause to fear
that the prospect of honors and emoluments may be held
out to induce unanimity of sentiment between parties who
were previously opposed to each other.
Hon. Mr. LONGWORTH.—Mr. Chairman, if the hon.
member is of opinion that all the leading men of British
North America have united to sell the rights of the
people, he should shew that the arguments they have made
use of are unsound.
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
9
Mr. SINCLAIR.—I said that the people should view the
proceedings with caution.
Hon. Mr. LONGWORTH.—The inference to be drawn
from the hon. member's remarks is as I have stated, and
the very argument he uses shows the propriety of putting
the question before the people. If it were introduced
here as a Government measure, that very fact would have
a tendency to influence the opinions of some on a matter
which should be divested of all party views and spirit. I
have heard no arguments to change my opinion that this
should not be made a Government question. If, recognizing
its importance, all approach it resolved to view it calmly
in all its bearings, we shall be doing justice to ourselves
and the people to whom it is due that it should not be
made the subject of party discussion. Full opportunity
will be afforded for discussion when the correspondence
shall be submitted, and the interests of the people will be
better conserved by treating the subject irrespectively of
party.
Hon. Mr. POPE.—As to the objection urged by the hon.
member from Princetown that the Government were not
justified in despatching delegates to Canada without the
previous sanction of this House, I may inform him that
His Excellency did so at the request of His Lordship the
Governor General, who, as such, is Governor of this
Island. With this request, of course, His Excellency the
Lieut. Governor felt it to be his duty to comply. The Government, I consider, is the
Executive Committee of this House
when it is not in Session, and must carry on the public
business of the country. The desire of the hon. leader of
the Opposition to embarrass the Government by this
irregular discussion is easily seen, and his motives are
duly appreciated ; but he may as well wait till the papers
are laid before us.
Hon. Mr. LAIRD. It is hard to say when the proper
time will be to consider this question As it has now
come up in the Address, though there are no other papers
before the House on the subject, I hold that this is a
proper time to give a right vote upon it. I believe the
pretty general opinion throughout the country is, that the
Government were a little rash in appointing one to a seat
in the Executive who had expressed himself so strongly in
favor of Union. The Government are bound to act according to the well understood wishes
of the people, and
in this case they have failed, consequently I cannot give
them my support. Supposing the Government be called
upon to send delegates to England to assist in preparing
a measure relating to the question for the Imperial
Parliament, if the Executive be composed of men in favor
of Confederation, they will probably send Home " red
hot Unionists. " The Government have not consulted
their own friends in regard to the appointment in question,
and they have acted contrary to the wishes of the people,
therefore I will oppose them.
Hon. Mr. KELLY.—Mr. Chairman, in the Session of
1863, when the subject of this contemplated Union was
for the first time mooted here; and last year when the
question of the appointment of delegates was before
us, I expressed my decided opposition to the whole
scheme, and I have seen nothing yet to induce a
change of opinion. It may suit some gentlemen in the
Island who can afford to remove to Canada to advocate
the merging of our political institutions into those of
that country. It has been said by some hon. members
that the present is not the proper time to discuss the
matter, as the paragraph in the address contains no
expression of opinion upon it. Such may be the case,
but I well recollect that when it was sought to effect the
Union of my native country with Great Britain, the wily
Lord Castlereagh used precisely the same arguments;
and although at that time he was defeated by an overwhelming majority, the next Session
of the Irish
House of Commons found him with his plans matured.
Bribery and corruption had time to do their work, and
did it but too effectually. I trust that hon. members of
this House will not follow his example, or meet the fate
which overtook the betrayer of the rights of his country.
Mr. HOWAT.—I suppose this discussion has been
brought pretty near to a close, but I wish to offer a
few remarks. I have opposed this Union of the Colonies
from the first. When the question of Union with the
other Maritime Provinces came up last Session, I objected to the appointment of delegates,
but was told
that it was only a matter of courtesy, and that those
appointed were not to agree to any scheme, but only to
report. Now, however, the case has assumed a very
different form. It has been said that this should be an
open question ; if so, I suppose I may be allowed to
differ with those whom I generally support. If Confederation takes place it will effectually
do away with
parties, for our powers as a local Legislature will amount
to little or nothing. I wish to oppose Union in every
phase and shape in which it can present itself ; without
considering the interests of my party, I must stand by
the country. I believe the appointment which has
been so often referred to was an injudicious one ;
however much I may respect the gentleman in question,
I think it was imprudent to appoint him, considering
that he has declared himself decidedly in favor of Union.
If, however, I can be assured that he will not hereafter
advocate Union I shall be satisfied ; but not otherwise, for I wish the Government
which I support to be
entirely composed of anti-Union men. I am in favor
of the amendment ; though I regret that a case has
arisen in which I should oppose my party, yet I feel
that this time I must do it.
Mr. DUNCAN.—I wonder where we are to go to find
an anti-Union party ; it is not to the Opposition, for
some on that side are strongly in favor of Union. I
think it is quite out of place to discuss this question
now, and for my part I will oppose the amendment. I
shall not fail, however, at the proper time, to state my
strong objections to the proposed scheme of Confederation.
Hon. Mr. COLES.—I did not expect that the hon.
member for Murray Harbor would support my resolution
—he could not be supposed to agree with any person
of liberal principles. Perhaps we cannot get an Anti- Union party in this House ;
but let us take the matter
to the country, and probably then the hon. member for
New Glasgow, or the hon. member for Tryon may be
called upon to form a Government. I am sorry that I
had to differ with the late leader of the Government,
since he exerted himself to procure my appointment on
the delegation.
Hon. Col. GRAY.—When did the hon. member differ
with me, for I never heard him express any difference
of opinion at the Conference ?
Hon. Mr. COLES.—I stated at the Conference when
they refused my proposition with respect to the Land
Question of this Colony, that they might as well strike
Prince Edward Island out of the constitution altogether.
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
10
Hon. Col. GRAY.—I never heard any such declaration from the hon. member in the Conference.
Hon. Mr. COLES.—The hon. member, then might
have heard it, for not being very well pleased, I made
the statement loud enough. I can tell him, also, of
another point on which we differed, namely the constitution of the Upper branch of
the proposed Federal
Legislature.
Hon. Col. GRAY.—I am unable to tell on what point
we were not unanimous, for if there was one delegate
at the Conference more ardently in favor of Union
than myself, it was the hon. member. I was not aware
that there was any difference of opinion which was not
mutual to the Island delegates.
Hon. Mr. COLES.—I can positively state that the hon.
member said in the Conference that in Prince Edward
Island they were opposed to the principle contained in
the resolution which I moved, viz., that the members
of the Legislative Council should be appointed by the
Local Legislatures.
Hon. Col. GRAY.—But I positively state that this was
not the case. How could I say that the people of
Prince Edward Island were opposed to such a principle,
when their opinion was not taken on the subject ?
Hon. Mr. COLES.—By the majority of their delegates
who were present.
Hon. Col. GRAY.—The hon. member well knows that
each Province had one vote at the Conference ; and as
the leader of the Government, it was my duty to vote
for this Colony. When four of our delegates were
opposed to any resolution, I was required to say that
Prince Edward Island was against it, and the contrary,
if the majority were in favor of the proposition. This
was the way in which the question was put ; and a
majority being opposed to the hon. member's resolution,
I had to say Prince Edward Island was against it.
Hon. Mr. COLES.—It is admitted then that there was
a difference of opinion on this point. On the financial
vote Prince Edward Island was unanimous ; but this
is not the question now before the Committee. With
reference to the remark of the hon. member for Murray
Harbor that no Government could be formed on anti- Union principles.
Mr. DUNCAN.—What I stated was to the effect
that no Government could be formed on that principle
from the present parties, without dismissing some of
their supporters. The Government is not a Union
Government ; if it were I would not support it.
Hon. Mr. COLES.—The hon. member apparently does
not wish to censure the Government for what is has
done in appointing a Unionist ; but I think the case
has been very well stated by the hon. member from New
Glasgow, that it is dangerous to have so many Unionists
in the Executive, for if delegates have to be sent
Home, they may appoint those who are strongly disposed to favor the proposed Confederation,
and therefore
commit the country to the scheme. There are several
acts of the Government during the past year to which
I object ; but the appointment under consideration is
one of which I entirely disapprove. When the question
of Union comes up again perhaps my hon. friend on the
right, (Mr. Whelan) will place the Government in an
awkward position by moving a resolution in favor of
the scheme.
Hon. Mr. WHELAN.—My hon. friend on the left (Hon.
Mr. Coles) seems very anxious to draw me out on the present occasion. I, however,
shall say only a very few words.
This discussion I consider as altogether irrelevant, because the question of Confederation
must come up again
when the papers on the subject are laid before the House.
I will not, therefore, enter into the merits of the scheme
at present, though I am not at all disposed to evade any
responsibility which attaches to me in the matter. I have
no desire to act one part in Canada and another in Prince
Edward Island. (Hear, from Hon. Col. Gray.) ThoughÂ
the delegates from this Colony did not gain all they could
wish, yet I was not disposed to throw aside a great question, and one which I shall
be prepared by and by to
show will be for the advantage of this Island. The
amendment of my hon. friend on the left, was brought
forward, I imagine, to show his opposition to the Union
scheme at the earliest possible period ; and perhaps to
show that he is still in opposition to the Government.
With respect to the latter, I will ever stand true to my
party, when the local policy of the Government is opposed
to my well-understood principles ; but on the question of
Confederation I cannot shut my eyes to the fact, which
has presented itself to some of the greatest minds on the
continent, that it is one of such momentous importance
as to call upon us to act upon it without reference to old
party predilections. Should the Government, then, be
prepared to introduce a measure to give effect to the Report of the Quebec Conference,
they shall have my hearty
support. One of the reasons assigned by my hon. friend
for submitting the amendment before the Committee, was
that he wished to show the people of the other Provinces
that this House was not in favor of a Union of the Colonies. But I believe the course
which he has taken will
have the contrary effect to what he intended. He ought
to have chosen another time to show his opposition to
Union, for hon. members on the other side of the House
cannot be expected to support his motion, although they
may agree with him in his opposition to Confederation,
consequently the division on his resolution will be such as
to lead the people of the other Provinces to suppose that
the Confederation scheme is not very unfavorably received
by this House. It is not my place or my intention to defend the Government, but it
appears to me to be a most
injudicious proceeding on the part of my hon. friend to
single out a particular appointment on which to censure
the Administration. If we are to object to the policy of
the Government, let us do it on general grounds. For myÂ
part, I may state that I approve of the appointment of the
Solicitor General—not that I say it ought to have been
made at this particular time, for I hold that the Government should have had firmness
enough to tell their principal Crown Officer to resign, and thus save them the
necessity of resuscitating an office which has become obsolete and unnecessary. This
is the course which I think
they ought to have pursued. But to object to the appointment of the Hon. Solicitor
General, because he has expressed himself in favor of Confederation, is a proceeding
of which I cannot approve. I rather hold it as one
reason why he should be appointed. This view is strengthened
by the fact that the other gentleman appointed at the
same time as the Solicitor General, is opposed to Union.
With regard to the second appointment, I think the Government might have selected
a person having stronger
political claims on their party ; but I will not censure
them for the appointment on the ground of his opposition
to Union. This question of Confederation is one which
should be viewed in all its future bearings ; and the Government will doubtless make
known their policy respecting
it, when the papers on the subject come up for consideration. Since Her Majesty's
Secretary of State for the Colonies has recommended them to give the scheme effect,
they
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
11
cannot well treat it with indifference, much less opposition.
When the proper time arrives I will be prepared to enter
into the merits of the whole question. I have had no
opportunity, through indisposition, to express my opinions
on the subject at any public meetings, except some held
in my own district; and when it comes up here I shall
regard it as my duty to assume all the responsibility
which attaches to my conduct in the matter, as well as to
deal with every feature of the question. I would be glad
were my hon friend to withdraw his amendment, as I
consider it to be too trifling a matter on which to divide
this hon Committee.
Mr CONROY.—Mr Chairman, if party feeling has not been
sunk on this question in this House, it has been pretty well laid
aside in the country. At Tignish, a part of the district which
I have the honor to represent, where the people are very much
divided in their political opinions, my colleague and I lately attended a meeting,
at which every one appeared to be opposed to
the proposed Union. I never saw a time when newspapers
were so much sought after, and the speeches delivered at public
meetings so generally read. The speech of the hon Solicitor
General was read in our part of the Island with great dissatisfaction; and his appointment
to a seat in the Executive
is considered, in consequence of his decided Union sentiments,
to have been very injudicious on the part of the Government.
I know that the country is dissatisfied with the appointment,
therefore I have no hesitation in supporting the amendment
proposed by the hon leader of the Opposition.
Hon Mr HENSLEY.—When I came into the house this
afternoon, Mr Chairman, the resolution proposed by the hon
leader of the Opposition was on the table. I would rather it
had not been brought forward, or at least, that it had been
put in another form; but as he appears desirous to press it,
every member must say yea or nay. The question on which
we are required to vote, is, Should the hon Solicitor General
have been appointed to a seat in the Executive? Notwithstanding all the respect which
I entertain for the hon gentleman alluded to, yet considering his extreme views in
favor
of Union, and the excited state of the country on the question,
I consider the Government would have stood better with the
people had his appointment not been made. When I
previously addressed you, Mr Chairman, I stated my intention
to submit a resolution expressing regret that the Government
had not declared its policy on the question of Confederation.
Though I have abandoned the idea of proposing a motion to
that effect, yet I must state, that as this subject is one of the
most momentous which has ever come before the consideration
of the Legislature, I think the Government ought, to have
given some decided expression of opinion upon it. I believe
there is sufficient information before the public to have
warranted such an expression of opinion. It is all very well
to say that a majority of the members of the Government
have made speeches against Union ; but they ought to have
come out as a Government with some decided declaration
in regard to the question. What information can be gathered
from such speeches when we find them here contradicting
each other as to the tendency of their remarks. Even some
of the speeches given in Canada, we are told, are not to be
understood in that sense which we would take to be their
natural meaning. I will vote for the amendment ; but in so
doing I disclaim any personal objections to the hon gentleman
to whom it refers. I have, on the contrary, a very high
respect for him. The hon member for Murray Harbor has
stated that he will support the paragraph, and not the
amendment. I have heard him express strong sentiments on
the question of Union—stating that the man who supported
the scheme must be almost a lunatic. If he is not sorry that
a person of this description should be appointed to a seat in
the Government, then I have nothing more to say. (Laughter.)
The question was then put to the Committee by the
chairman:
For Mr Coles' amendment—Honorables Coles, Kelly,
Thornton, Warburton, Hensley, Laird; Messrs Sinclair,
Conroy, Walker—9.
Against it— Hons J. C. Pope, Longworth, Col. Gray, Col.
Secretary, Davies, Kay, Speaker, Whelan ; Messrs Ramsay,
Brecken, Montgomery, Haslam, Green, McLennan, Duncan
—15.
Progress was then reported, and the House adjourned till
10 o'clock to-morrow.
This individual participated in:
