PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
62
THURSDAY, March 30.
Hon. Mr. KELLY.—Mr. Speaker ; In rising to address you
on this all important subject of Confederation with Canada and
the Lower Provinces, I find few arguments adduced in favor of
it which have not been ably confuted by hon members already.
Sorry I am to see as its advocates hon members in this House of
whose talents and position in any other cause our Island might
justly feel proud. I wish, Sir, to record my determined
opposition to Confederation with Canada or with the Lower
Provinces in any shape or on any terms. I feel convinced that
any change in our constitution of the nature contemplated, would
not operate beneficially to us. We are told that unless we
surrender our separate constitution and place ourselves under the
protection of the Canadian Legislature and the general
Confederacy of Canada, we shall be overrun by, or absorbed
into, the United States. I have no fear, Sir, that the Government of the Stars and
Stripes will interfere with us if we do not
interfere with them, of which there is little prospect. I am glad
to hear that New Brunswick has condemned the scheme—that
Nova Scotia does not wish it, and if report speaks truly, Newfoundland is not likely
to adopt it—and it has been said that a
majority of the people of Canada are themselves opposed to it.
But I regret to hear some hon members of this House, while
declaring their opposition to the measure, their willingness to
adopt it, if more favorable terms could be obtained for the Island.
I have no doubt, Sir, that the Canadian diplomatists having set
their minds upon effecting their object, would, rather than fail in
their pet scheme, yield whatever concessions might be required
of them, knowing that their preponderance in the United
Legislature would enable them to make whatever alterations in
the terms they pleased, and that the mockery of a parliament
then left us would render us powerless to prevent them, or even
to complain. The hon and gallant Colonel, the member for
Belfast, told us a few evenings ago, that in agitating for a repeal
of the Union between England and Ireland, O'Connell would have
gladly accepted a restoration to College Green of an Irish Parliament similar in its
constitution to that proposed for us at the Quebec Conference. The hon member labors
under a sad mistake.
Sorry would a great man have been to have accepted for his
country a Legislature less independent than that which she
possessed before it was traitorously sold from her by a pack of
wretches elected to the last Parliament of that ill fated nation
through the influence of Pitt, Cornwallis and Castlereagh. A
few of the names of those men I will read to you from a list
which I hold in my hand, and although the descendants of some
of them may retain the titles so villainously obtained, their
names and races will be held in execration by Irishmen over the
world to the end of time. The present question forcibly reminds
me of the lament of your gifted countryman, Mr Speaker, when
he refers to the sad time
"When once beneath a monarch's feet
Sat Legislation's sovereign powers."
We have, Sir, sovereign legislative powers, whereby we can
make our own laws and direct the application of our own monies
among our own people at our own pleasure, and I hope the day
is far distant when this, our Parliament, shall be converted into
a Barrack or a Bank, or ourselves deprived of the constitutional
privileges which we have so long enjoyed under the guarantee of
the Imperial Government. The following list contains the
names of some of the parties who sold Ireland, and the prices at
which they consented to barter away the constitution of their
country :—Lord Shannon, £45,000. Lord Loftus, £45,000. John
Bingham, a Peerage, (Lord Wallcourt.) James G. Blackwood,
a Peerage, (Lord Dufferin.) Joesph Cuffe, a Peerage, (Lord
Tyrawley.) Richard Hare, a Peerage, (Lord Ennismore.)
John Hutchinson, a Peerage, and a Regt., (Lord Hutchinson.)
Wm. Handcock, a Peerage, (Lord Athlone.) Charles Coote, a
Peerage, (Lord Castlecoote, since extinct.) Lodge Morris, a
Peerage. William Newcomen, a Peerage for his wife. John
Blaquiere, a Peerage, (Lord DeBlaquiere.) G. Cradock, a
Peerage, (Lord Howden) John Longfield, a Peerage, (Lord
Longueville.) Wm. Sandford, a Peerage, (Lord Mt Sandford.)
Richard French, a Peerage, (Lord Ashtown.) John Stewart,
a Lawyer, a Peerage, and a Judgeship, (Lord Clonmel.)
Arthur Galbraith, an Attorney, a Baronetcy. Herculus
Langrishe, a Baronetcy and £15,000. George Jocelyn, his
brother made a Bishop, (Clogher.) Henry Alexander, his
brother made a Bishop. John Bagwell, his son made a Dean,
John Fitzgibbon, son of an obscure Roman Catholic Lawyer,
made Lord Chancellor and Earl of Clare, an arrogant, cruel and
overbearing tyrant. Isaac Corry, Chancellor of the Exchequer.
John Toler, made L.C. Justice and a Peer, (the brutal Norbury.)
Luke Fox, a Judge of the Common Pleas. Charles Osborne,
Judge of the King's Bench. St. John Daly, Judge of the
Common Pleas. Robert Johnston, Judge of the K. B. Wm.
Johnston, a Baron of the Exchequer. James McClelland, Baron
of the Exchequer. Wm. Smith of the Exchequer.
R. Torrens, a Judge of the King's Bench. W. Vandeleur, a
Judge of the Common Pleas. The lowest of the foregoing at a
salary of £3,300 a year with over 20 country Judges at £600 a
year. In addition to the foregoing I might give the names of
over twenty-five of the Renegades who were made Colonels
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
63
in his Majesty's service, among whom is the name of the
aforesaid Charles Coote to a Regiment taken from Colonel
Warburton,the grandfather, I believe, of our own hon member
of that name from Lot 1 1, and who, to his lasting honor be it
remembered, "Castlereagh" could not purchase.
Mr. CONROY.—Sir, I have considerable diffidence in
addressing you on the subject before the House, on consequence
of the very long and eloquent speeches we have listened to for
the last three nights ; but I believe every gentleman in the
House is expected to state his opinions on the matter before us.
I do not hesitate to say that I am decidedly opposed to the contemplated Union. Two
questions have occupied the most
prominent part in the debate—Finance and Glory. I do not
think that any person can be found so simple as to believe that
the terms offered can be financially beneficial to us. We give
up our present revenue for little more than half its amount.
The sum we are to receive is not to increase with our increasing
population. While we give to strangers the power to raise our
duties of impost and excise to any amount they choose, we have
no guarantee but that in a few years, if we entered this famous
Confederation, they would be raised to three times the amount
they are at present. As the wants of the Confederacy would
require, taxation would be increased. And what control or
management are we to have in our affairs? Having but five
representatives in a Parliament composed of one hundred and
ninety-four members, we might as well have none at all. But
it is said that we need not fear, that taxation will be uniform,
and when they tax us they also tax themselves in like manner.
But, Sir, when I observe how unwilling we have been to increase
our tariff in a trifling way, for the purpose of raising an amount
which we absolutely required, I cannot see how we can agree
to place such a power in the hands of persons who are so
reckless in matters of taxation affecting themselves ; and as to
the glory part of the scheme, as it is called, I have no sympathy
with soldering unless it is required, nor would I agree to have
our Militia sent to Canada; they had better stay at home and
protect their own country ; and if, as it is said, the battle must
be fought in Canada, all the better for us. With the protection
and support of England we need not fear ; but if England is to
abandon us, as some say she will, and the United States should
make war on us, the more quietly we submit the better. That
we could, by entering into the proposed Confederation, successfully resist such a
power is simply absurd. Sir, I have no fear
that the Americans would come here to cut our throats or do us
any serious injury. We have never done them wrong, they
have no revenge to gratify ; and when I say this I must be
understood as not expressing disloyal sentiments, for have I not
read of English statesmen, even in Parliament, stating that their
protecting these Colonies cost more than they were worth, and
the sooner we were left to ourselves the better, showing their
loyalty to us to be a matter of pounds, shillings and pence? So
that if we are to be abandoned by the Mother Country, we should
be permitted to look for protection in the place most beneficial to
ourselves. A,d Sir, I have heard it discussed within the last
few days by men of standing in this city, whether it would not
now be more beneficial to this Island to enter into the great
American Union than remain as she now is. And throughout
the country—more particularly among the tenantry—the fear of
American invasion is not as great as might be fancied. they
say that whoever comes they cannot be worse off than they are
at present, and, at all events, it will completely settle the Land
Question. They say they have nothing to fight for, that they
have little interest in the soil, that they have to procure a
miserable livelihood by daily toil, that wherever they go they
can earn a subsistence as easily as they do on this Island. And
this being so, can you expect people so situated to risk their
lives in defending the country? I will now quote from a
respectable newspaper published in Montreal, wherein, reviewing
a speech of the Hon. T.D. McGee, made in fence of the Irish
residing in Canada from the charge of Fenianism, the Editor
goes on to say that he fully coincides with Mr McGee that Irishmen in Canada have
no sympathy with Fenianism, that they,
beyond any other people, left their country on consequence of
the land tenure, but in Canada they possessed all the advantages
they sighed for in Ireland. The land they tilled was their own
in freehold, and they would fight for its possession against all
comers. This is what I want for our people ; give them their
land in freehold, give them an interest in the country, without
which no man can be truly loyal, and you will not want for
Volunteers or Militia here to resist invasion. I have read that
the Canadian Delegates, in excusing themselves for agreeing to
such on outlay as would be caused by building the intercolonial
railroad, said that they had to do so, as the Delegates from
Nova Scotia and New Brunswick would have nothing to do with
them before they agreed to build that road. And had our
Delegates no public work, the performance of which they might
urge should be agreed on before we entered into any terms?
Why did they not press the extinction of the rental system as a
work of necessity, and insist on receiving the means necessary
for abolishing it? We have heard with what small courtesy the
Leader of the Opposition was treated by the Delegates when he
proposed a resolution asking for a sum to purchase the claims of
the Proprietors. Some of the Canadian Delegates stated, I
believe, when in Charlottetown, that the amount asked for by
the Leader of the Opposition would be given, but the proposal
was afterwards ridiculed. Sir, I want to say that the money
could not have been better laid out ; it would have relieved this
Island from a difficulty, social and political, which has been the
great grievance of this country for the last fifty years, and has
kept the country periodically in a state bordering on rebellion up
to the present time. The amount asked would be scarcely
distinguishable in the gross total, for the debt of Canada is
counted by millions, and this, if we enter into the proposed
Confederation, we must assist in paying. But we will have
nothing to do with this Union. We can, by increasing our
taxation for a few years, make every man in the Island a
freeholder. Nor do I think the country would be displeased at
our doing so, as it would be for the general advantage. I have
spoken much longer than I intended, and will conclude by
stating that I will vote for the amendment.
Hon. Mr. DAVIES— Mr. Speaker; the hon member from
Tignish (Mr Conroy) has stated that unless we continue to
enjoy British protection we shall be absorbed into the United
States. I would be sorry that we should become a part of a
country, the public debt of which, created without about four
years, is already no less than three billions, or, in other words,
three thousand millions of dollars. I am not apprehensive of
such an event, for the British Government, under the pressure
of public opinion in Great Britain, has declared we are willing to
do our share in assisting your reasonable efforts to defend yourselves. I agree with
those hon members who have argued
Confederation involves increased taxation. But, Sir, we cannot
remain long in our present isolated condition. Confederation
or absorption into the States are the two alternatives presented
to us. I should prefer to see this Island made, if possible, a
free port, and thus, become a vast centre of commerce. As to
the financial terms offered to us by the delegates at the Quebec
Conference, I do not think that justice has been dealt out to us.
We should receive half a million of dollars, for it must be borne
i mind that for various reasons which have been referred to in
this debate we will not receive benefits proportionate to those
conferred on the other Colonies. In the present aspect of the
matter, I would give a preference to a Federal Union with
Great Britain to absorption or confederation. It has been
objected by the hon members, Messrs. Sinclair and Howlan, that
the delegation to Canada was unauthorized by the Legislature.
Why, Sir, the Governments of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick
did not convene their respective legislatures to sanction their
delegations. As to the argument that the delegates exceeded
their powers when they framed a constitution, they would be
laughed at if they had not done so. We are not bound to
accept it, and it is unfair to find fault with them on that account.
Mr HOWLAN.—The first delegation was authorized to discuss
the subject of a Union of the Maritime Provinces. The Canadian
delegation had an entirely different object.
Hon Solicitor GENERAL.—I cannot agree that under the
system of Responsible Government the Executive had no power
to send a delegation to confer with those sent from the other
Provinces. The case would be different if the country were
pledged to their proceedings.
Mr SINCLAIR.—I maintain that in adopting a constitution
they exceeded their powers. This having been signed by three
members of the Government, that body is, to a certain extent,
pledged to it.
Mr MONTGOMERY.—Mr Speaker ; I have been informed
and believe that the Report of the delegates is not approved by
the people, and, in my own opinion, it would prove injurious to
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
64
the best interests of the Island. It calls upon us to increase our
tariff and surrender our revenues. We are required to surrender
revenues for 80 cents per head of the population according to
the census of 1861. We do not receive fair terms. We have
no minerals or territorial revenues as the other Colonies. We
have benn told that we shall have free trade with all parts of the
Confederacy. If so, we must raise whatever revenue we may
require beyond the allowance accorded to us from the general
Government, to which we ourselves contribute from our own
resources. For myself and my constituents I shall oppose the
scheme.
Mr. McLENNAN –I shall not detain you long, Mr. Speaker.
It is but dull debating when all are on the same side. I shall
not enter into the question of defence,–that I shall leave for the
hon and gallant Colonel. the member for Belfast ; that of finance
to his colleague, the Hon Col Secretary. I am conscious that
anything which I may say can have no effect in promoting or
retarding the adoption of the measure. If that were not the
case I would be inclined to enter more fully into the merits of
this great question. Our action one way or the other can make
little difference in the view of the opinion expressed by the people
of New Brunswick at the hastings, and in Nova Scotia through
the press. The protraction of this debate is, in my opinion, but
a waste of public time and money. I would prefer that the vote
were taken on the resolutions of the Hon Col Secretary seriatim.
That would show the country how far their representatives would
go in this matter. I am not prepared to go the extreme length
of those who declare they are opposed to Confederation on any
terms. I am of the same opinion as the hon member for the
city, Mr. Davies, who believes that we are drifting into some
kind of Union, that we should manfully grapple with the question,
and, before any Union takes place, obtain the best terms possible.
I believe that majority of the people of New Brunswick had not
the subject fairly submitted to them in all its bearings when they
voted against it ; nor was it the bulk of the intelligence of that
Province that decided it. For myself I would not assume the
responsibility of voting in favour of Confederation without first
submitting it to the people. I believe my constituents are
satisfied that I am acting an independent part in the matter.
Hon. Mr. WHELAN then addressed the House at considerable length, but he having mislaid the extract
which
he read, the Reporter is unable to give a connected report
of his speech.
Mr. DUNCAN –I have a few words to say on this great
scheme which is to make this a wonderful country, give us
a market of three millions of people, and cheap teal all
the way from China. All those who have been in
this Colony heretofore, it appears, are but children in
trade ; let them, however, only go up to Canada a few
weeks and they will come down perfectly prepared to argue
out any question on trade and finance. We are told that
Confederation would promote manufactures in this
Colony. Now, in my opinion, this Island can never
become a manufacturing country, and I will give my
reasons for so thinking. Supposing a person were to start
a manufactory here, and another a similar establishment
at Pictou, the former would have every market closed
against him during the winter except this Island, and the
latter would have all the country open to him the whole
year round except this Colony in the winter season. The
Pictou manufacturer could always send off his stock to
market immediately while his Island rival would require
to store his up for five or six months until the opening of
navigation in the spring. The Islander, besides requiring
an immense capital, the interest of which would diminish
his profits, would frequently suffer from a fall of prices,
causing a loss which might have been obviated by an open
market. I do not think that any place which is closed in
as we are for a part of the year has ever become a great
manufacturing country. Then, again, the neighboring
Province have other advantage over this Island for
manufacturing. Canada has abundance of water power ;
so have Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and those latter
Provinces possess coal likewise. But this Colony has no
coal, nor has it iron, another advantage which its
neighbor possess. This being the case, I think few
manufactures can be carried on successfully here. The
tanners may have a little export for a few years ; but
the bank will soon be done, and then probably it will be
better to export the hides and import leather. Our
interest therefore, as we cannot manufacture, is to obtain
our goods in the cheapest market. The other Provinces
cannot compete with Britain in manufactures for many
years ; but if we enter Confederation we may be forced to
purchase within its bounds, on account of the high tariff
on European merchandize. This would prove a loss to
the Island in the following way : Suppose an article
which could be purchased in Britain for £100 were to
cost in Canada £118 ; but on account of the duty on the
British article, it might be found more advantageous to
purchase that of Canadian manufacture, the consequence
being the loss of just £18 to the Island. This would
be one of the benefits arising out of the boasted intercolonial free trade ! By remaining
as we are, the people
of this Colony, generally speaking, will obtain their
goods, even after paying a moderate duty to be expended
among themselves, at a cheaper rate than they would
under Confederation. But there are certain articles, such
as tea, which can never be produced in these Provinces ;
and which, under the Canadian tariff, would cost the
people here much more than at present. Again, we are
told that if we enter Confederation our fisheries will be
developed. People, it is said, will come here from Canada
to fish. This is a strange argument, when it is known
that the Canadians already export enough fish to supply
all British America.Herrings wehave not to spare ;
these will have to be procured at the Magdalen Islands, a
place which, though it has been basking for a long time
under the sunshine of the Canadian Government, does not
show many signs of progress. Everything which can be
exported from this Island Canada produces, therefore no
trade of any importance can spring up between this
Colony and that Province. Notwithstanding this, I
suppose we must contribute to build the Intercolonial
Railway. The only article I see that we have got to send
to Canada is oysters. Evidently, the Colonial Secretary
has been very considerate in bringing in a Bill to encourage
the planting of oysters, as it seems to me that we will
have nothing else to send up to Canada on theIntercolonial
Railway. Then, again, there is the matter of defence.
It is stated that the police force which Canada has on the
frontier this winter to prevent border raiding will cost a
million of dollars. We are now in the Union, our
proportion of that sum, according to the population, would
be £768. But the general defences of Canada, according
to Colonel Jervois, are to cost$ 6,500,000. In Confederation this Island would have
to bear its share of this
expense, one which, in the present circumstances of our
people, they are altogether unable to afford. Another
objection which I have to the Quebec scheme is, that it
would allow us only about £35,000 for local requirements,
and this too a
fixed sum, while our wants would yearly
increase ; perhaps the Canadians thought that under such
a scheme they would
decrease.(Laughter) Our
Revenue for last year was about £65,000, and deducting
the sum to be received from this amount, shows that our
loss under our own tariff would be £30,000. But besides
this we would have to bear our proportion of building the
Intercolonial railway, enlarging the canals, and furthering
other public works, which would increase our taxation,
and do us no good, but rather an injury by drawing away
our people to labor upon them. Again, the "glory
argument" is one which the advocates of Confederation
never fail to bring forward. We are to become agreat
nation, but how this is to be affected the promoters of the
scheme scarcely understand themselves. One of the
advantages of it is, that our members of Parliament will
go to live at Ottawa, and we will be left here to pay
them ! We are told also that ouryoung men will rise to
be chief justices in Canada. They need not deceive themselves, for none but those
belonging to Canada will stand
much chance of attaining to such distinction. The Local
Legislature, which the QuebecReport contemplates to
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
65
leave us, would be little better than a town council ; we
would have this building here merely to look at. As to
the General Legislature I consider the representation in it
allowed to this Island unfair and unjust. I think the four
Lower Provinces, at least, should have as many members
in the Upper Branch as Canada. The five representatives
allotted to us in the Lower House would not give this
Colony much influence there ; but as our population will
not increase so rapidly as that of Canada, there is a
prospect, through the operation of one clause in the
Report, that our five representatives would dwindle down
to three. Taking all these points into consideration,
therefore, it is clear to me that we have nothing to gain
but much to lose by adopting the Quebec scheme.
Adjourned.
This individual participated in:
