PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
65
FRIDAY, March 31.
Debate on Union of Colonies resumed.
Hon. Mr. COLES.— Mr. Speaker: As leader of the
Liberal party of this Island, I felt in a peculiar position
while attending the Conferences on the question of
Colonial Union now before the House, I felt that in
acting as a Delegate I had not my own interest merely to
look to, but that of a party who have acknowledged me
as their leader for nearly eighteen years. And now, Sir,
in addressing you I desire to make such explanations as
may satisfy my constituents and the party with whom I
am connected, in regard to the course which I have pursued on this question. Explanations
of this nature may
fairly be expected from me, since I am the only Delegate
in this House opposed to the Confederation Scheme of the
Quebec Conference—being one against four. It has been
stated by former speakers that we all agreed to the scheme
while at the Conference. I object to this statement. I
admit that we were all unanimous in passing the first
resolution of the Report ; but it was only with the understanding that the details
of the scheme were to be just to
the several Provinces. Those who affirm that there was
unanimity at the Conference ground their assertion, I
believe, on several speeches delivered at evening meetings.
But, Sir, I contend that an occasion graced with the presence of ladies—such being
the case when I spoke at
Ottawa—was not the proper place to attack any person,
or take strong exception to any vote passed at the Conference. I did not do so then
; but at the Conference a few
days before, I said that if the grant for the purchase of
the lands of this Colony was not conceded, they might as
well strike Prince Edward Island out of the Report altogether. The public men of Canada
knew my views on
the subject : this is evidenced by a paragraph which lately
appeared in the Toronto
Globe, a paper under the control of the Hon. George Brown. The
Globe says :—
"The anti-Confederation papers at Halifax are making much
of the fact that two of the Prince Edward Island delegates who
were at the Quebec Conference have, since their return home,
declared against the Confederation scheme. These gentlemen
are the Hon. E. Palmer, Attorney General in the present
Government, and the Hon. George Coles, a leading member of
the Opposition. The attitude assumed by these gentlemen is
but what was to have been anticipated from expressions made
by them while in Canada, so that their hostility to Confederation is not any indication of the way in which
the scheme has
been received by the people of the Provinces. The gentlemen
had their minds made up before their constituents had heard the
details of the Quebec scheme at all. "
Even my speech at Ottawa did not give satisfaction to
the supporters of Confederation in Canada, for afterwards, the brother of the proprietor
of the Toronto Globe
came to me, at Toronto, and desired that I would not
persevere in the sentiment to which I had given
utterance, namely, that the scheme would require to be
submitted to the people for their approval. All that I
said on that occasion which can be construed as favorable
to the series of resolutions passed at the Quebec Confer
ence, is, that it was creditable to the delegates from so
many Provinces that they could agree to draw up such a
Report. I still hold to that opinion ; and the BritishÂ
Government has also acknowledged that it was a creditable Report. If the people, I
remarked, were satisfiedÂ
with the scheme, I had nothing more to say on the subject.
But that I was personally dissatisfied with the new Constitution is clear from the
fact that I refused to sign it.
Before I left Canada, the Secretary of the Conference
came to me, supposing probably that I was opposed to
the Report, and asked me if I would sign the document.
I said no. He then answered that if I should agree to
sign it he would send it down to Prince Edward Island.
I said, " you need not trouble yourself. " I may also
mention that Hon. Mr. Gray of New Brunswick, in one of
his speeches after his return from Canada, stated that all
the delegates at the Conference had signed the Report,
and would be bound in honor to support it. This, I
thought, was going too far, so I wrote a letter to the
newspapers here contradicting the statement, and showing
that it was not correct at least as regarded myself. And,
Sir, we have been informed during this debate that two
others of the delegates from this Island have not signed the
document. The absence of their signatures, however, is
a matter of little consequence, as they have agreed to the
Report, one of them having broadly declared that its
principles are just and liberal to Prince Edward Island.
It was understood that the proceedings at the Conference
should be secret ; but they have been alluded to by
delegates at other places, therefore there can be very little
impropriety in referring to them in this discussion. I
may also mention here that when the proposition in favor
of secrecy was first made at the Charlottetown Conference,
I objected to it, but stood alone in my opposition. I
was then allowed to state the fact to my constituents. I make these explanations,
for it may be
necessary in the course of my remarks to refer to the
proceedings at the Conference in self vindication. Only
two of us, I believe, who were delegates to Quebec, object
to the terms of the Report. For this opposition we have
been charged as being almost traitors. Indeed it has
been affirmed that Anti-unionists are guilty of combining
with Americans against British interests. Hear what the
Hon. D'Arcy McGee said in the Canadian Legislature on
this subject. During the course of his speech on the
Confederation question, in replying to some interruption
from the opposition benches, he remarked :—
"The hon. member for North Hastings Mr. (T. C. Wallbridge)
seemed to repudiate the idea that American influence had anything to do with the result
of the New Brunswick elections. He
had to tell that hon. gentleman that one of these successful candidates was agent
for the American line of steamers, the
International line, which did all the carrying trade to New
Brunswick, and here was not a pound of the stock of that
Company held in New Brunswick. (Hear, hear.) It was inÂ
point of fact a fight—a fair stand-up fight of Yankee interests
on the one side and British interests on the other ; and those
who were rejoicing over Mr. Tilley's defeat were in reality
rejoicing over the defeat of British interests. It was a contest
between prejudice and patriotism ; between ignorance and intelligence ; between Yankee
influence and the broad national
principles of British North American policy. (Hear, hear.)
Those who rejoiced over this state of things might congratulate
themselves if they chose; but it was for the House to stand by
the true public opinion of the country. It was for us to show an
example of firmness and good faith in carrying out this scheme.
It was for us to shew the Empire that we were determined to
adhere to our original resolution and that we were not people
who would forget our determination in a few days or a few
weeks. " (Cheers.)Â
I deny these charges. I believe that the Anti-unionists
are just as loyal as any Unionist can be. I feel that my
loyalty is equally as sincere as that of those who so
zealously advocate the Quebec scheme, for I have yet to
learn that Great Britain has said we must go into
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
66
Confederation. All that we have yet heard is the saction
of the Colonial Minister to the holding of a Conference in
Canada, consisting of representatives from all the Provinces to consider the larger
scheme of Union, and his
opinion that the Report of that Conference upon the
whole was creditable to the assembled delegates. And
this much too has been accorded evidently to please
Canada, owing to the troubles in which her politicians
have become involved. What foundation, then, have
those for their statements who tell us that we shall be
compelled to go into Union ? who say that unless we enter
the proposed Confederation we shall not get a single ship
or man from the Mother Country to defend us ? The
Home Government has given not intimation of the kind.
In fact it seems to be passive in regard to the Union
movement. The Colonial Minister stated in eflect in one
of his despatches that it the people of the Colonies were
desirous to enter into a Union, Her Majesty's Government
would throw no obstacles in the way. This language
conveys no such threat as has been held up by some hon
members of this House. Indeed Mr. Cardwell does no
appear at all satisfied with some portions of the Report.
He has taken exception to the provision with respect to
the prerogative of pardon, and to the principle of having
a fixed number of nominated life members in the Legislative Council. To the latter
principle I made strong
objections at the Conference, and fortunately for me 1
also referred to the matter in the public prints before the
Colonial Minister's despatch was received. My reason
for opposing such a provision was that as the members of
the Legislative Council were to be nominated from the
existing Councils in the different Provinces, a number of
them would be old men, who had been obstructives, and
might remain so all their lives, consequently a dead-lock
would probably soon occur between the two branches of
the Legislature, in which case an appeal would have to
be made to the Imperial Government to settle the dispute.
They have had quite enough of disputes in Canada
already. In that Province, Sir, the parliament buildings
have been burned, and the Stars and Stripes thrown out
to the winds. Such proceedings, Sir, have never been
seen in the Lower Provinces. (Cheers.) And are we now
to be told that we must enter a Union with them, and
submit to such taxes as they may choose to impose? The
amount to be allowed this Colony under the proposed
scheme is some ÂŁ35,000 a year, and more than this we
are not to receive for local purposes though our revenue
should increase to ÂŁ200,000. but does Mr. Galt say
respecting allowances to the local governments ? In
explaining this part of the Report he remarks:—
"Now one objection to confederation was made on the ground
of expense, and in order to meet this, every effort had been
made to reduce the cost of the Local Governments, so that the
local machinery should be as little costly as possible, for it
would not do to aflront the intelligence of the people, and tell
them we had devised an expensive kind of machinery to do a
very insignificant amount of work. The gentlemen from the
Lower Provinces had been asked what reductions they could
make in the Government of the several colonies, and the figures
he was about to give would be most satisfactory as showing the
disposition of those gentlemen, who had reduced their requirements to the lowest sum. In her estimate of outlay for 1864 for
objects of local character the Province of Nova Scotia had provided for an expenditure
of no less than $667,000, but had
undertaken to perform the same service in future under a confederation at $371,000,
or a reduction of 40 per cent. The
expenditure of New Brunswick in 1864 for the same objecis was
estimated at $404,000. From causes explained at the time and
shown to be satisfactory, she proposed to reduce the expenditure
to $353,000, and at the same time undertook within ten years
tn make a further reduction of $63,000; making a total reduction to $290,000. Prince Edward Island would reduce her
expenditure from $170,000 to $124,000, and Newfoundland
from $479,000 to $350,000. In regard to Upper and Lower
Canada he would not undertake to say what reduction would
be made ; but he could show that under the scheme proposed they
would have the means of limiting the present outlay which was,
taking the average of the last four years, $2,021,979. Besides
that there would be an additional item brought against them for
the interest on the excess of their debt over that of the other Provinces, making
their full local charge $2,260,149, which was
the present outlay of Canada for works which would not
become a charge under a confederation. The outlay of all the
provinces being however greater than their local revenues it became necessary to make
provision out of the general Fund for
the purpose of enabling their Local Legislatures to carry on
the machinery of Government. It was proposed to take away
from them every source of revenue they possessed except minor
local revenues, and then to give them from the public chest a
sufficient subsidy to enable the machinery to work. The estimate was formed on the wants of Nova Scotia. It was at first
proposed to form it on the wants of New Brunswick, but these
were found greater than those of the former, which had consequently been taken as
the basis. The estimate was that 80
cents a head on the population of Nova Scotia would be sufficient to enable her to
work her local system. She would want
$264,000. In the case of Upper Canada, 80 cents a head was
considerably more than she wanted at the present day, and in
the case of Lower Canada was at least adequate with the present local funds that would
become available to her. But it was
felt that in giving a subsidy from the public chest it was impossible
to draw a distinction between one part of the country and another. But it was not
intended to hold out any inducement to future
extravagance to local Governments, but it was hoped that by
the operation of natural causes such a check would be put upon
expenditures as would bring them down to the lowest point, or
at least prevent them from becoming lavish. Therefore the
subsidy proposed to be given to local legislatures was fixed, not
at an increasing rate according to population, but at the rate Â
which existed at the census of 1861. By this means, as the
population increased, the subsidy would not increase with it.
Upper and Lower Canada would thus get within a fraction of
two million dollars, and when their population increased to five
millions instead of two and a half, would get no more. If they
increased their expenses in proportion to the growth of population they would be obliged
to resort to direct taxation; and he
thought they might trust the people themselves to keep a sharp
watch over the local Governments lest they should resort to direct taxation. He thought
no surer check could be put upon
them than thus fixing the grants they were respectively to
receive."
Now, Sir, this is the opinion of the Finance Minister of
Canada, who may be considered as good authority in
regard to the contemplated working of the Quebec
scheme; and he urged it in an address to his own
constituents at Sherbrooke, as a reason why they should
gladly accept that scheme. Here we may see the pitiable
condition to which this Island would be reduced under
Confederation,- our revenues taken away, scarcely
enough allowed us to work the machinery of the local
government, and should more money be required when
our population increased, it would have to be raised by
direct taxation. The people of this Colony were battling
four years to gain responsible government, and since
obtained, I believe it has given general satisfaction. But, Sir, were we to adopt
this Report, it
would deprive us of our constitution and leave us no
corresponding benefit in return. It is urged that as a
compensation for our less we would become part of a
great union that in time would form a mighty nation.
But I ask what greater nationality can we enjoy than that
with which it is our pride and privilege at present to be
connected? What greater flag can wave over us than the
time-honored banner of Old England ? I do not think
that Great Britain wishes to throw us off; on the contrary
I believe that her statesmen see that the separation of
the Colonies from the parent state would cause trouble.
Sir, I look upon this talk about the Mother Country
casting us off from her apron strings, and this shakin of
the stars and stripes in our face, as only stories intended
to frighten the timid. Let us remain true to the Mother
Country and she will stand by us. Separate as we are
from the other Colonies, our hands are just as strong and
our hearts as willing to aid in the defence of the Empire,
as they could be under any scheme of political union
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
67
whatever. The union which I advocated was one that
would give is inter-colonial free trade and a uniformity
of currency. But here is this Report we have a constitution under which we may be
taxed at any rate the
Canadians think proper. At present we hold the power
of taxation in our own hands ; under Confederation, it
would be placed almost entirely beyond our control, as
well as the power to say what portion of these taxes im
posed upon the people of the Colony should be expended
for objects in which they are immediately interested.
To revert to the meaning of the Conference at Charlottetown, I may say that the Government
having behaved so
handsomely to me by giving me a commission as a
delegate without asking my compliance to any particular
course, I was disposed not to persist in some of my views.
if the administration of the day were inclined to enter
the proposed Union. I yielded more of my principles
than I would ever do on such an occasion again. When
the Canadian delegates came down to the Conference the
chief points which they laid down were representation by
population for the Lower House, and a nominated Upper
House to consist of 60 members—20 for Upper Canada,
20 for Canada East, and 20 for the Lower Provinces.
Representation by population, however appeared to be
the leading principle for which they contended. I
enquired what they would be willing to concede to us for
giving up the privilege of taxing ourselves, and for
handing over the revenue ; and they asked what I thought
would be fair. I said ÂŁ200,000, sterling, or ÂŁ300,000,
currency : and that this money should be placed into our
land funds, entirely at the control of the Colony for the
purchase of proprietors' estates. This proposition, I
understood, was assented to. I had also private conversations afterwards with Hon.
Mr. Brown and Hon.
Mr. Cartier, and they admitted the justice of the claim.
With the impression that a grant to the amount, and on
the conditions which I have stated, was to be given to
this Colony for the purchase of lands, I did not offer that
opposition at Quebec to some of the first clauses of the
Report, which I otherwise would have done. I found
that two of the leading members of our Government were
in favor of Union, and providing that anything like fair
terms were allowed this Island, I was disposed to throw
no obstacle in the way. I little thought then, however,
that such a constitution as this was to be brought down
here. We had been in Conference only a few days when
the question of representation in the Upper Branch came
up for consideration. On account of the Newfoundland
delegates taking part in the proceedings, and it being
proposed to give that Colony 4 members in the Legislative
Council, the Canadian ministers retired into their council
chamber, and returned with the proposition that 24
members should be allowed to each of the two sections of
that Province. Lower Canad stood out for equal
representation in the Upper Branch as a security against
the superior influence which the Upper Province would
possess in the Lower House on the principle of representation by population. When
the question of representation
in the House of Commons came up for discussion, this
principle was ably and strenuously contended for by the
Hon. George Brown ; and well it might, for he knew that
it would enable Upper Canada to maintain the control of
the General Legislature for ever. Representation by
population will give the two Canadas 100 of a majority
over all the Lower Provinces in the House of Commons,
and by each of the Canadas having as many members in
the Legislative Council as the whole of their eastern
sisters, they will together always command a majority
there of 24 over us, so that the only principle on which
we, in the Maritime Colonies, can expect justice will be
through the quarrels of the two western Provinces. In
view of this, I ask what prospect is there for us if we
give up our revenue, but to put our hands in our pockets
and pay our own expenses. We cannot hope to contend
with the influence which will be brought the bear against
us in Canada. What did we see in Toronto but an
establishment fitted up with every convenience, which was
presented to the Hon. Mr. Brown in consideration of his
advocacy of Upper Canada's interests ? And then again
in Lower Canada, the Hon. D'Arcy McGee has been
presented with a house, furnished complete to the silver
plate on the table, for his advocacy of the interests of
Montreal. These examples show what is to be gained by
able and persevering politicians in Canada ; but here we
have no reward save the sense of right in defending the
interests of our country. (Cheers.) It has been said by
some of the advocates of the Quebec scheme that we
should bot blame the Canadians if it contains objectionable
provisions, for, at the Conference, votes were taken by
Provinces. They were not at fault in all cases ; in a few
instances the delegates from the Lower Provinces were
most to blame. Several of the Canadians were in favor of
the elective principle for the Legislative Council ; but
nearly all the delegates from the Lower Provinces declared
against it. They seemed to be carried away with the idea
of the members of the Upper House being taken from the
existing Legislative Councils in the several Colonies, and
voted that they should be appointed for life. On this
question the delegates from the other Lower Provinces
acted in a most selfish manner. They even agreed to the
Canadian proposition that the number of Councillors should
be fixed. This, as I have already stated, I consider a
very objectionable feature in the new constitution. We
know that in Nova Scotia they had to break through the
warrant of Her Majesty and appoint additional Councillors
to carryresponsible government. And we also know that
in Britain it is sometimes found necessary to create new
Peers in order to carry certain measures. But I wish to
explain further in regard to the action taken in the Conference on the question as
to whether the Legislative
Council should be elective or nominative. After the
motion in favor of making it elective was lost—as I held
the opinion that if it were not elective, it ought to be
constituted, as nearly as possible, on that principle—I
submitted a resolution to test the Conference on the
point. When I did so, I was under the impression that it
would be placed on record. During the first few days
after the Delegates met, all motions were put down, and also
the names of the movers and seconders, the understanding
being that business was to be conducted according to the
practice of the Canadian Parliament. Subsequently,
however, it was agreed that the votes should be taken by
Colonies, and that no record should be kept of the
proceedings. But to show that the clause as it stands in
the Report did not pass without an effort on my part to
modify it, I will read the resolution which I submitted :
"Resolved, That at the first and all subsequent elections of
members to serve in the Upper Branch of the Federal Legislature, they shall be chosen
to a majority of both branches of
the Local Legislatures from such properly qualified persons in
the Colony as shall be of upwards of thirty years of age ; one- half of the said Council
to go out every four years after the first
election. Those who shall go out at the end of the first four
years to be decided by lot, and the drawing to take place during
the first Session of the Federal Legislature."
I considered it advisable that the men who should represent each Province in the Legislative
Council, as they
would be few in number, ought to be appointed by, and
possess the confidence of, both branches of the local
legislature. This provision I deemed especially neccessary
as regarded the interests of this Island, for it is extremely
doubtful, should the Union take place, whether we shall
ever have a singly representative in the General Government ; and if otherwise, we
at least cannot expect more
than one. My motion, however, was lost. I will not
accuse my brother delegates from this Island, who voted
against it, of being actuated by the same motives as the
majority from the other Provinces evidently were. These
saw the difficulty of the Confederation scheme receiving
the sanction of the present Legislative Councils of the
several Provinces unless their leading members felt secure
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
68
of a seat in the Upper House of the General Legislature,
therefore they provided that the Legislative Councillors
of the Federal Parliament should be nominated from the
existing Councils. To ensure as much unanimity, also,
as possible at the Conference, a clause was thrown in to
the effect that due regard should be had to the claims of
the members of the Legislative Council of the Opposition
in each Province. But this provision will be of little
account, for after the divisions which the discussion of
the Confederation question has caused, I think it will be
difficult to tell how individuals stand with respect to
parties. When I saw the drift of the whole section in
regard to the constitution of the Legislative Council as it
now stands in the Report, I strongly expressed the hope
that the delegates would except this Island from such a
piece of corruption. Again with respect to our Local
Legislature under the Confederation scheme, what would
it amount to ! We would be a laughing stock to the
world. The City Council would be a king to such a
Legislature. In this House scarcely anything would be
left us to do, but to legislate about dog taxes and the
running at large of swine. Some hon members have
referred to the great advantage of this Colony being
allowed to retain its local legislature. Probably they
intend to remove to Canada themselves, and care little
about what they leave behind them. I will now turn to
the financial part of the Report. When the Committee on
finance was appointed at the Conference, I was so satisfied
that the proposition for a grant of ÂŁ200,000, sterling, to
this Colony would be carried out, that I scarcely gave
the appointment any consideration. But, Sir, when the
committee reported at the Conference Board, I was
struck with amazement, and expressed myself very freely
to that effect. At my suggestion it was resolved that the
committee should reconsider their scheme. But, Sir, I
believe that my objections to the committee's report
aroused the delegates from Newfoundland and New
Brunswick, for when it was brought in again next
morning a subsidy was provided for each of these Colonies,
but it did not include any allowance for this Island.
Newfoundland received a liberal consideration at the
hands of the committee, the sum guaranteed to her being
$150,000 annually. The Report says that this allowance is
for the surrender of her mines and minerals and public lands
to the General Government ; but in reality it was given to
that Colony on account of the plea put forth by the Newfoundland delegates that their
people were, to a great
extent, paupers. The Colonial Secretary informed us at
the Town meeting that the grant to Newfoundland was
made in consideration of her revenue being nearly wholly
derived from customs' duties, the relinquishment of which
would leave her without any local income. But I ask
what are the local revenues of this Island ? Would we
not be nearly in the same position as Newfoundland if
our revenue from duties were given up to the General
Government ! Then New Brunswick, too, received a
consideration to induce her to enter the Uuion, namely.
the respectable sum of $63,000 a year for ten years. This
grant, no doubt, was obtained through the able advocacy of
Hon. Mr. Tilley, who was on the committee as finance
minister for that Province. And, Sir, I am not much
surprised that the ÂŁ200,000, sterling, was not secured
for this Island, since I heard the Colonial Secretary, who
acted on the financial committee for this Colony, declare
that he considered the terms of the Report just and liberal
to Prince Edward Island. When I objected to the report
of the financial committee on the ground that no grant
was to be given to this Colony, the Hon. George Brown said
that more money was already allowed us than we would know
what to do with. And no wonder that he said so, when the
delegate from this Island, who assisted to draw up the financial
arrangement, affirms that it is liberal. I shall next refer to the
subject of expenses, and show that our taxation must be greatly
increased. Besides having to tax ourselves for local improvements, we will have to
bear a share of the expenses of Canada,
as she is unable to meet them now, and will be less able to do
so under Confederation, for they will be much heavier than at
present. In the matter of defences alone the outlay will be
enormous. What says Colonel Jervois' report ? I will read
an extract from the Quebec Chronicle of March 17, 1865,
which, after giving some remarks of the London Times on that
report, freely admits that Canada is unable to undertake the
share of these defences assigned her. The Chronicle remarks ;
"Turn we now for a brief space to the consideration of that
portion of the Times' article having reference to the preparation
for defence. There is something in it so naive, and at the
same time so thoroughly selfish, that we hardly know whether
to be most amused or most contemptous. Speaking of the
fortifications which Colonel Jervois's report says are necessary
for effectual defence, the Times says--
"'They are no trifles, indeed. Canada, though with but a
small population, has a long frontier ; in fact, it may be described as being all
frontier, and as being vulnerable all over.
There is hardly a village of a farm in the country that is more
than a few days' march from some spot which may be reached
at once by a party of Federal soldiers. Hence the magnitude
of the works, which if executed by the Provinces will be a rea
financial burden to them, and if takes in hand by as will add
considerably to our estimates for years to come. Colonel Jervois says that he regards
the works for the defence of Montreal
and Quebec as being of the most pressing importance. The
cost of these at Quebec is to be ÂŁ200,000, of those at Montreal of ÂŁ443,000, and the
armaments at those places will cost
about ÂŁ100,000. The works of fortification recommended at
Kingston, Toronto and Hamilton will cost about ÂŁ500,000, and
the armaments for those places about ÂŁ100,000. Thus on, fortifications for Canada
alone it is proposed to expend ÂŁ1,343,000,
which any one acquainted with the history of such matters is
well aware will expand to at least a couple of millions. Now,
of this sum Her Majesty's Government propose to supply ÂŁ200,000--the amount necessary
for fortifying Quebec. This is "an
Imperial fortress ;" it was the scene of one of the most celebrated of English victories,
and has so wide a reputation as one
of the strong places of the world that the national honor is committed to maintaining
it. We have no desire to quarrel with
the decision of the Goverument. Whether the Canadian Government will really spend
half a million on fortifying Montreal,
as Lord de Grey expects, we very much doubt, for there is a
great difference between calling out Volunteers and Militia at a
time of excitement, and taxing the community to raise masses of
earthworks and put guns in position. If the fortification of
Quebec by England be looked upon as part of an arrangement
between the Mother Country and the Colony, then we suppose
we must submit and pay the ÂŁ200,000, or whatever more the
works may cost. But we cannot affect to say that it will be
done with any enthusiasm.'
"Any one acquainted with such matters, we are told, well
knows that these fortifications will cost two millions sterling.
Of this sum the Times considers two hundred thousand, or one- fifth, all, and more,
than Great Britain's share of the expenditure. And this view of the relative responsibilities
forces us to
return to the cause which necessitates the outlay. Again then,
we say, Canada has no quarrel with her powerful neighbor, nor
would have but as a dependency, an outlaying portion of the
British Empire, a weak point, vulnerable and easily assailable.
That we are all this is no fault of ours ; but says the Times,
" you must take the consequences, you must fortify the weakest
points, and England will undertake that which requires the
least expenditure." But wherefore must we ? Suppose we are
not able ? How then ? And most assuredly we are not. Two
millions less one-fifth--ÂŁ1,800,000 sterling ! Something more
for armament and militia, and we shall reach perhaps somewhat over the original two
millions--a sum as nearly as may
be equal to a pound sterling per head of the whole population,
or five dollars for every man, woman and child in the Province
Gentlemen of Tooley Street, it can't be done. If Canada
wants defending England must defend her."
Now there is the opinion of ones of the Canadian newspapers,
and that of the London Times. About two million pounds,
sterling, will be required for fortifications, and of this sum
Great Britain will only provide ÂŁ200,000, leaving an amount to
be raised by Canada, together with the armaments she will have
to provide, equal to five dollars per head of her population.
This sum would be more than enough ; yet it is not all that
would be required. In connections this subject I will read
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
69
the following extract from the Hamilton Weekly Times, another
Canadian Journal :
"Equally necessary as the construction of the fortifications
will be the creation of an outlet to the sea-board. In case of
war with the United States, we would have no means of communicating with the outside
world save by the St. Lawrence.
At the best this would be unsatisfactory, for it would be liable to
be only open to us during the summer months. In winter we
could make no use of it, and would be compelled to obtain a
new route to the sea independent of that which in time of peace
we enjoy through United States territory. The intercolonial
railway would be an absolute necessity. Saying nothing as to
the infinite difficulty, if not impossibility, that would be
experienced in keeping such a line open in the face of a vigilant
and powerful foe, we would refer at present only to its cost.
The estimate furnished is that it can be built for $15,000,000,
and the amount that Canada would be called on to pay would be
$6.000,000,—the balance to be provided by the Maritime
Provinces. This, together with the construction of fortifications,
would have to be proceeded with at once."
These works, it is said, must be undertaken at once, but it will
take some years to complete them ; and does any person suppose that if the Americans
are going to attack the Colonies they
will wait until we are prepared ? Sir, this whole talk about
invasion from the United States I believe to be a will-o'-the
wisp got up to frighten us into Confederation. But let us
proceed with the calculation of expenses. The Confederated
Provinces would set out with a debt of $25 per head : fortifications will add at least
$5 per head more, and gunboats and
other naval armaments probably an equal sum. Then there is the
Intercolonial railway, which will cost at least $15,000,000, and
add a further debt of $5 per head of the population. The
enlargement of the Canals is another project, requiring a draft on
the finances, which is to be proceeded with as soon as practicable.
This work will add not less than other $5 per head to the
general debt, and what with the opening up of the North West
Territory, and other expenses which I have not enumerated,
will run up the debt to $60 per head of the entire population of
the Confederate Provinces. We have been informed during this
debate that the debt of the United States now amounts to $125
per head of her people. But this debt was caused by a protracted war. Our debt of
$60 per head would be incurred
during peace ; and should war break out with the States, even
for a short time, our debt would soon be equal to theirs. I
believe that a few hundred pounds spent on a friendly delegation
to Washington would save millions of dollars, and do much
more to preserve peace between the two countries than all the
fortifications which could be built. All these expenses to which
I have referred, a large portion of which will have to be borne
by the General Government should Union take place, shew
clearly that our taxation under Confederation must be very
heavy indeed. But some say that the people of this Island are
too lightly taxed. I admit that were the money spent among
themselves in local improvements, perhaps they would not
suffer by a little higher taxation ; but when the money is to be
taken away and spent in other Provinces, it quite alters the
case. This House has just voted ÂŁ50,000 to aid tenants in
purchasing their farms ; Sir, we would be acting more wisely to
vote ÂŁ150,000 for this purpose than to enter the Union. The
ÂŁ50,000 which we have voted this year would be nearly the
amount we would lose every year under Confederation. In
Canada they have stamp duties and other taxes which we in
this Island know nothing about ; and once united with that
country they would send down their collectors to gather up the
money and carry it off. Talk of our young men rising to
judgeships, and to be premiers in Canada ; why, Sir, they have
far too many hangers on of their own, for our youth ever to
expect any favors at their hands. The politicians in that
Province are sometimes put to their wits and how to provide
snug berths for persons they wish to shelve out of their way. A
little transaction of this kind occurred when the delegates were
there. A member of the Legislature was appointed to a judgeship under the Stamp Act,
in order to make room for the
Provincial Secretary, who had lost his election in the district
which he formerly represented. Under Confederation such
work would, no doubt, be carried on to a much greater extent,
and amid the intriguing of Canadian office seekers on the spot,
the young aspirants in Lower Provinces would stand very
little chance of success. I wish now to refer to exaggerated
statements which have been made by union advocates respecting
the prosperity of Canada. This attempt has been so ably
exposed by Hon. Mr. Currie, a member of the Canadian
Legislative Council, in his speech before that body on the
Confederation question, that I think I will be excused for
reading his remarks. Mr. Currie said :—
"But speaking of the Lower Provinces, he was really
afraid that some public men down there were disposed to
exaggerate the advantages of a Union with Canada, just as
some of ours seemed prone to magnify the riches of the
Lower Provinces. If we were going into a partnership,
which he hoped would last if entered into—(hear, hear,) —
we should not attempt to deceive each other, for if the people
found they had been deceived, the compact would be short- lived. To give honorable
members some idea of the manner
in which the subject was presented by leading men in the
provinces, he would read them an extract from the speech of
a Mr. Lynch, at a large meeting in Halifax, as reproduced
by one of the organs of the Government there."
"Hon. Mr CAMPBELL—What organ?"
"Hon. Mr. CURRIE—They had so many organs they did not
seem to know them all. (Laughter) He would now read
from the speech in question:—
"'But we are told by others that we had better have
nothing to do with Canada, because she is bankrupt. Canada
bankrupt! I wish we were all such bankrupts. She is
overflowing with wealth. This is now rapidly developing
itself, and must eventually place her among the first nations
of the earth. I have travelled over and examined that great
country, and it would take more than all the time allotted to
me to tell you of her wealth and resources. Her rivers are
among the largest in the world, and her lakes are mighty
inland oceans. I never had any idea of their extent until 1
stood on the shore of Lake Erie, saw before me a large square
rigged ship, and was told that such was the class of vessels
that navigated those waters. Why, sir, 7,000,000 tons of
shipping trade upon those mighty lakes. Again, look at the
growth of the population. Sixty years ago it was 60,000,
new it is 3,000.000. Upper Canada doubled her population
in ten years, and Toronto, in the beginning of this century
the abode of the red man of the forest, is now one of the
finest cities of British America, with a population of 40,000.
The soil is of the richest description, indeed it is only too
much so. In some places rich alluvial deposit is found to
the depth of 50 feet, and in many instances lands have
yielded their crops for years without the aid of a spadeful
of manure. Canada has not only the greatest yield but the
best wheat in America. It is a. well-known fact that the
people of the United States in exporting their best flour mix
it to a large extent with Canadian wheat, and in order to
give you an idea of the increased growth of it I would inform
you that while in ten years the wheat crop increased in the
States 50 per cent. (an immense increase), it in the same
time in Canada increased 400 per cent. The average crop
is equal to that of the best wheat growing countries in
Europe, while some places have yielded the almost incredible
quantity of 100 bushels to the acre. The yield of last year
was 27,000.'
"He only wished that this honorable gentleman alone had
been mistaken, but even the Hon. Mr. Tilley, one of the
most. distinguished statesmen of New Brunswick, had made
the statement that our tariff was in fact only an eleven per
cent. tariff. But all the errors were not on that side, for
they need but to turn to a celebrated speech of one of our
own leading men—a speech regarded almost as an important
state paper—and there it. was stated that the United Provinces would become the third
maritime power in the world.
(Hear, Hear) England, it said, was first, then the United
States, and the speaker doubted if France could take the
third rank before us. Our sea-going tonnage would be five
millions, and our lake tonnage seven millions. These were
vast figures, and it almost bewildered the mind to conceive
their-magnificent proportions. (Laughter) Now supposing
all these vessels were 500 tons each, it would require 14,000
to make up the sum, but unfortunately the census showed
that we had but 808 sailors to navigate them—rather I.
small number it must be admitted for 14,000 ships. (Great
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
70
laughter. ) The way the mistake—to use the mildest expression—was made, was simple
enough. The vessels were
entered at the Custom Houses every time they came in and
left port, and as some of them came into port 200 times in
the year, as at Toronto for instance, their tonnage was
counted 200 times. It was easy in this way to run up our
inland marine to seven millions of tons."
Now, Sir, this is the way the advocates of Union endeavor to
deceive the people of the Lower Provinces. Even the Hon.
Mr. Tilley is not altogether innocent on this point. And in this
Island, too, deception has been attempted. The famous speech
of the late leader of the Government at the dinner of the Caledonian Club, was an
illustration of this, for he spoke of the
taxation by the municipal boards in Upper Canada as of no
account, whereas wee know it is in a great measure levied for
local requirements such as are here defrayed out of the public
chest. Then again the Colonial Secretary came out with a new
table of figures every few days, showing that the gain to the
Colony by Confederation was to be so and so. But, Sir, their
efforts to delude the people did not meet with much success
here. Some of the young men of the Anti-union press are as
well posted up in figures as their opponents, and have done
good service to the country by showing up the fallacies of the
Union advocates. In spite of all that those in favor of Confederation can say, it
is clear that our taxes will be increased.
Before all the expenses which Union will inevitably bring with
it can be met, probably even the present high tariff of Canada
will require to be raised. Then what will the party in Britain
say who advocate a separation of the Colonies from the Mother
Country on the ground of their expense ? They would indignantly enquire Are our people
to continue paying taxes to protect these Colonies who are doing all in their power
to injure
out trade by levying still heavier duties upon our manufactures.
Sir, I would prefer free trade with England, the land of my
fathers, to free trade with Canada. If we are to give any privileges let them be accorded
to those who have protected us in
times past, and not to those who never did anything of the
kind. If we are to pay any sum for defences let it be given to
the Mother Country, which can protect us, and not to Canada
that is quite unable to protect herself. I am much mistaken if
Great Britain would allow the Provinces to impose high duties
on British goods ; and if this were the case they would then
have to resort to direct taxation. But I now come to a point
respecting which a good deal has been said, namely, the alteration of the Report by
the Canadians. I have here before me
three copies of the Report, and they are all different. In the
first copy sent down here, which was signed by Sir E. P. Tache,
the President of the Conference, the 24th section reads thus :—
"24 The local Legislature of each Province may from time
to time alter the Electoral Districts for the purpose of Representation in the House
of Commons, and distribute the Representatives
to which the Province is entitled in any manner such Legislature
may think fit."
In another copy which I received since, and which is the same
as that lade before the Canadian Legislature, the section has
been altered to read as follows :—
"24. The local Legislature of each Province may from time
to time alter the Electoral Disticts for the purpose of Representation in such Legislature, and distribute the Representatives
to which the Province is entitled in such local Legislature in
any manner such Legislature may seem fit."
Now, Sir, this is a very material alteration, in a very important
clause, and does not say much for our safety should we place
ourselves in the power of the Canadians by entering Confederation. It has been said
in justification of the alteration that the
section referred entirely to the Local Legislatures, and therefore
the rendering in the clause as it first stood was evidently an
oversight. This apology, however, is unsatisfactory, as the 24th
section is not in that part of the Report which relates to the
Local Legislatures, but in that which lays down the constitution
of the House of Commons. I may say that a dispute arose as to
whether the General Legislature should be allowed to arrange
the constituencies, and it was understood that this power should
be left to the Local Legislatures. When the delegates for this
Island contended for 6 members in the House of Commons
instead of 5, our chief argument was that if we were allowed 6
representatives, it would render it an easy matter to divide the
electoral districts between the three Counties. The Hon.
Attorney General brought forward this proposition, and when it
was decided against us, and the principle of representation by
population strictly adhered to, l was particular in noticing that
rhe right of distributing the representatives to which each
Colony would be entitled, should be left with the Local
Legislatures, because I considered such a provision would afford
us some protection, by placing it beyond the power of the
Canadians to divide the constituencies in order to carry their
own objects. Judge of my surprise, therefore. at receiving,
three or four weeks after my return home, a letter from Mr.
Bernard, Secretary to the Conference, and who is also Clerk of
the Executive Council of Canada, a letter, enclosing a copy
with the 24th section altered as I have stated, and explaining
that the alteration had been made because the wording of the
section in the first copy, was an accidental departure from the
views of the Conference. But I have lately received another
copy in which there is an alteration in favor of Nova Scotia and
New Brunswick . providing that the former shall be allowed to impose an export duty
on coal and the latter on timber and logs,which
special reservation was not in the copy laid before this House.
This alteration, I consider. is equally as culpable as the other.
What right, I ask, had the Canadian Government to alter one
word of the document after it was signed? They might almost
as well change the whole Report to suit their own particular
views. I wish also to show that this Report, as a whole, does
not place Nova Scotia and New Brunswick in such an unfavorable position as this lsland.
'l'hese Provinces have large local
revenues, that of Nova Scotia in 1863. being, as shown by Mr.
Galt in his speech at Sherbrooke, $107,000, and that of New
Brunswick in the same year $ 9,000. He sets down the local
revenues of this Colony at $32,000 ; but I am at a loss to
know how he made up that sum unless he included in the
amount the instalments paid in during the year from the sales
under the Land Purchase Act. This money, however, forms
no part of our local revenues ; it is all required to make up the
price paid by the Government for the proprietors' estates which
have been purchased. In the neighboring Provinces the case
is different ; their public lands are Crown lands, the sale of
which brings in a large revenue, that will be wholly available
for sectional purposes, Taking into consideration also that these
Provinces are to receive 80 cents per head for their local wants
as well as this Island, and that New Brunswick is guaranteed a
subsidy besides, they are tolerably well provided for. But
Canada will fare still better. Her local revenues in 1863. as
given by Hon. Mr. Galt, were $l.297,043 ; and the allowance
of 80 cents per head of her population would yield her about $2,000,000, which will
just be $2,000,000 more than she now
expends out of the public funds for local purposes. This Island
hitherto has almost solely relied on her customs revenue, and
therefore it is that with the small per capita allowance of 80
cents, we would be unable to carry on the local government
without restoring to direct taxation. We are even prevented from
levying an export duty on our produce, while this privilege is
allowed Nova Scotia and New Brunswick on certain articles.
Taking all these points into consideration, I think it is clear that
the Report before us is not such as should be adopted by this
House. To enter such a Confederation as is here proposed
would evidently prove ruinous to the Colony. If a change is
thought desirable, I consider it would be more for our advantage
to have a representation in the British Parliament, and to
pay a per centage to the Imperial Government out of our
revenue for any purpose they may think proper. I believe
that one representative there would secure for us a greater share
of justice than we are ever likely to receive from a federal
legislature in Canada. Should Confederation take place, I believe that in a very few
years the people under it will be as
heavily taxed as the people of the United States are now at the
termination of a civil war. 1 shall vote for the resolutions
submitted by the hon. leader of the Government, and trust they
will receive the support of a large majority of this House; also
that an Address to Her Majesty will be passed, showing the true
position of this Colony in regard to the Confederation scheme.
(Prolonged cheers.)
After a few remarks by Hon members who had already
spoken, the motion was put on the amendment submitted by
Hon J.. C. Pope in lieu of the resolutions approving of the
Quebec Report, proposed by the Hon. Colonial Secretary,
which amendment was carried on the following Division:
For the Amendment—Hon. Messrs. J. C. Pope, Longworth,
Laird; Davies, Kaye, Coles, Kelly, Hensley, Thornton, War—
burton, Benton, Messrs. Ramsay, Montgomery, Yeo, Duncan,
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
71
Brecken, Howat, Conroy, Howlan, Sinclair, Walker, Sutherland—23.
Against it—Hons. Colonial Secretary, Solicitor General,
Gray, Whelan, and Mr. Green—5.
Mr. Sinclair then proposed a Resolution, to the effect that,
Whereas the Government had exceeded the authority of last
Session by the appointment of Delegates to Canada ; and
whereas this House, by resolutions, declared that Confederation, if effected, would
prove disastrous to the rights and
liberties of the people of this Colony, therefore, that the
Government should appoint no further Delegations, or take
any action to alter the Constitution without the express
authority of the Legislature.
A discussion then ensued on the subject of this Resolution,
when it was argued that the adoption of such course was
unusual and would place extraordinary restrictions on the
prerogative of the Government.
The question was then put on the said Resolution which
was negatived on the following division:
Against it—Hon. Messrs. J. C. Pope, Gray, Longworth,
Laird, Davies, Kaye, Col. Secretary, Solicitor General,
Whelan, Thornton ; Messrs. Ramsay, Montgomery, Haslam,
Yeo, Duncan, Brecken, Howat, Green, McLennan—19.
For the Resolution—Hons. Messrs. Coles, Hensley, War- burton, Beaton, Kelly ; Messrs.
Sinclair, Conroy, Howlan,
Walker, Sutherland—10.
The Resolution was accordingly lost.
Hon. J. C. Pope then submitted a Resolution for the purpose of appointing a Committee
to prepare a joint address to
Her Majesty the Queen, founded upon the Resolutions of
that House, upon the subject of the proposed Confederation
of the British North American Colonies, expressive of the
determination of the Legislature, on the part of the people
of the Colony, not to assent to such Confederation.
Ordered, that the Hon. Messrs. J. C. Pope, Longworth,
Hensley, Coles, and Mr. Sinclair, be a Committee, on the
part of that House, to prepare such address.
After which, at a very late hour, the House adjourned.
This individual participated in: