PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
126
[...]
Confederation.
The order of the day was then taken
up and gone into, for the House in
Committee on the message of His Honor
the Administration of the 14th [illegible]
transmitting various Despatches and
papers.
Mr. Kelly in the chair.
The chairman having read the Despatches-
HON. Mr. HOWLAN rose to move a
resolution, [illegible] before doing so would
briefly express his sentiments upon the
question of a [illegible] of this Colony with
the Dominion of Canada, and as the despatches just read, had brought this matter so
fully to the notice of [illegible]
committee he would not re-read them.
It [illegible] admitted that the [illegible] of
the [illegible]
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
127
gentlemen came to ascertain if there were
valid reasons why this Island should refuse to confederaate with Canada, and to
see if there was what they might regard
as "method in our madness," when we
refused to do so. Nor did he suppose
exception would be taken to the reception which the Government, on behalf of
the Colony, extended to those gentlemen.
They had been told that if terms better
than those contained in the Quebec report were given, our objections would
be removed. Well, they came and sought
information not merely from the committee of Connell, but from other public
men also and he (Mr. H.) thought that
was quite proper. It was an important
question, and public men, whether in the
legislature or not, had a perfect right to
express their views respecting it; and he
(Mr. H.) thought it their duty specially
to do so on such an important matter as
that upon which the gentlemen from the
Dominion Government came to seek
information. He would look at the question in its political aspect. Those who
held the reins of power in the Island
were known as the Liberal party, which
nigh thirty years ago unfurled its flag,
upon which was inscribed "Free Soil,
Free Education, and a Free Press." This
party had of late years been augmented
by an element known as the Tenant
Union element, and the men of this party
were not a whit behind their liberal
friends, if they did not go much further
in advocating their principles. It was
true the great Liberal Chief, who so
nobly led his party to victory was now in
the neighboring Province seeking repose
for his tired brain, which had, for nigh
half a life time been so overtasked on
behalf of the interests of his country.
The second in command had, with the
full consent and concurrence of his party,
been elevated to the Bench to aid in the
better and more satisfactory administration of justice; but around those desks
he saw enough of the spirit of those who
unfurled the old flag, and whose determination was not to [illegible] up the constitution
of the country into other hands
until the portrait of the last landlord was
hung up in the Legislative Library of
the Island as a memento of the past.
Then, and not till then, would the different sections of the country be brought
into closer communion with each other
by the introduction of the iron horse,
which could then run through one free
farm, as it were- extending from the
North Cape to the East Point, carrying
the products of our thrifty and enterprising farmers to the best market. He
would now ask the committee to look at
the $800,000 proposed to be given as
compensation for the loss of our crown
lands. This he (Mr. H.) contended waas
not a sufficient equivalent [illegible] ;
for having figured the matter [illegible] himself and duly compared our losses with
the corresponding advantages derived by
the other colonies from their public lands,
the very lowest amoutn we should rereceive was $1,240,00, which sum would
enable the Government of the Colony to
settle up the land and education [illegible]tions satisfactorily. and in other respects
place us in about the same position as
the other Provinces now were. It was
true we were but a Colony of 100,000
people yet we prized our constitutional
rights and privileges which were as dear
to the inhabitants of this Colony as they
were to those living in any of the other
Provinces. We might be told that with
all our constitutional privleges we
should be able to settle the vexed question ourselves, but that as we [illegible]
not
done this, we should join the Dominion
as its influence would soon obtain this
settlement for us, and hence the offer relative to the $800,000 on condition of
our entering into partnership with
Canada; but were we to do so we should
be allowed as much for our land as they
vained their own at, which was $1 an
acre; and as the area of our Island was
about 1,240,000 acres, that would give
us, as he had before stated, $1,240,000,
the interest of which would, at 6 per
cent., amount to about £22,230 per year.
Such a sum would go far to enable us to
strike the sum required for schools and
lands out of the annual vote required for
the public service of the country. But,
he saw no reason why we should ever
think of receiving that money from the
Dominion. Canada did us no wrong,
and owed us no money. In coming
down here to make enquires, and in
following them up with proposals, she,
no doubt, was situated by a desire to do
justice to her weakest and youngest sister. But, supposed we did enter into
Confederation, and efforts to induce the
Home Government to pay the $800,000
were to fail, and Canada should ever be
called upon to pay the money, the
Dominion Government might say they
bought us. And is the [illegible] of such
statesmen [illegible]
of this Colony would [illegible] themselves
placed in an [illegible] position. Again,
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
128
what reason had we to suppose that
a succeeding Government might not
disannul the arrangement. We found that
even now Ontario was loudly complaining,
and quite recently Mr. Blake brought
forward a resolution having reference to
the alteration made in favor of Nova
Scotia, and said:
"In some way or other the compact must be
re-affirmed and safeguards against its violations
imposed. It must not be regarded as a mere
statute to be altered by a majority. If the subsidy can be changed, what is to hinder
a majority, under the dictation of the ministry of the
day, reversing that portion of the compact
which provides that representation shall be
based on population ; there can be no such [illegible]
ground for the Dominion amidst the storms
which will beset her if the original compact is
not adhered to in its integrity, or changed with
due care and formality by the power which
created it - the Imperial Parliament."
While he (Mr. H.) would be very sorry to
[illegible] the slightest disrespect to the government of the Dominion, yet if he
might
be allowed to judge the present and the
future from the history of the past, and
compare small things with great, he
thought Ireland's history for the past hundred years would in several particulars,
be a close analogy to the history of this
Island. She also had two troublesome
questions which were promised to be
settled - her land and church questions.
"Come into the House of Commons,"
said the wily Castlereagh, "and your
grievances will receive due consideration." They went and according to Sir
Jonah Barrington, in his "Rise and Gall
of the Irish Nation," cajolery, deceit,
bribery, corruption, and intimidation
were resorted to, to bring about the
union, to such a shameful extent, that
the then Speaker of the House of Commons earned the sonbriquet of the
"undertaker." Henry Grattan, too,
one of the purest patriots the world ever
saw, lived long enough to see all the fair
promises which had been made, broken,
his own influence withered, and cause
sufficient given him to curse the day
the union was consummated. But, lest
Barrington might be regarded as a partial witness, he would read an extract
from the London Times, which corroborated his statement. The Times
said:
"In 1798, at the very crisis of way with
France, an insurrection broke out in Ireland,
and was only suppressed with great bloodshed!
Pitt made this the occasion of promoting a union
between Great Britain and Ireland, as necessary to the safety of the state, and he
wished to
accompany the great reform by two measures
which he believed likely of vital interest to
Ireland, A state provision for the Catholic
priesthood of Ireland and the emancipation of
the Irish Catholics. A majority of the cabinet
opposed this policy. The King was aware of
it, and the support of the Irish Catholics to the
Union was obtained on an understandin ; at
least that its supplement, so important to
them, was to be an integral part of it ; but
when, after the Union had passed, Pitt had
tried to accomplish the rest of his plan, the
King absolutely refused this union on a scruple about his coronation oath."
The result was, the Catholics of Ireland
were betrayed and Pitt was driven from
office. Harrington said: The Catholics,
in 1798, were ranged ; in 1799, carressed ;
in 1800, cajoled, and in 1801, discarded
altogether! È He (Mr. H.) would now
invited attention to the result of the union
of Scotland with England. On looking
over a speech in the Parliamentary Reporter, delivered by the hon. Leader of
the Opposition, in 1866, he saw that he
then stated that--
"The great benefit of that national treaty
had been generally felt and acknowledged for
the last hundred years."
Hon. Mr. HOWLAN. - No, It is not.
The hon. member at that time went on to
say:
"From the period of its (the Union's) accomplishment, there was awakened in Scotland
a spirit of industry and enterprise formerly
unknown in that country, and ever since the
two kingdoms of England and Scotland, incalculably to their mutual benefit, have been
gradually forgetting their former subjects of
discord, and uniting cordially, we the people, in
the improvement and defence of their union
country."
He (Mr. H.) would now see how that
agreed with what Smollet's History,
vol. 1, page 242, said:
"In 1725 the malt tax was found so grievous
to the people of Scotland that they refused to
pay it, and writs ensured at Glasgow. The
populace rifled the house of Donald Campbell,
their representative in Parliament, who had
voted fro the tax. They maltreated some excisement, and were fired upon by the military.
Twenty were killed and wounded. Evenutally
General Wade took military possession of
Glasgow. A bill was passed to indemnify
Donald Campbell from the proceeds of taxes on
all the beer and ale brewed in Glasgow. Against
the malt tax petitions were presented by the
convention of the Royal Burghess, and from
different times treating it as a burden their
country could not bear."
In 1784, as we find at page 333, three
Scotch Dukes, Hamilton, Queensbury,
and Montrose and three Earls, Dundonald,
Marchmont and Stair, presented a petition
complaining "that undue influence had
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
129
been used for carrying the election of
representative Peers." The Duke of
Bedford presented their petition. It was
stated that a list of names had been
handed in called the 'King's List,' and
that endeavors were used to induce Peers
to vote for the list, by promises of pensions and offices civil and military, to
themselves and relations ; that pensions,
offices, and release from debts owing to
the Crown, were actually granted to
Peers who voted for the 'list.' The
petition was rejected, but not without a
motion for renewed enquiry, which
plainly demonstrated the truth of the
allegation contained in the petitions.
McCulloch, page 312, said:
"In 1787, a bill was sent down from the Lords
for punishing the magistrates and city of Edinburgh on account of the murder of John
Bortens. This brought up the question as to
whether the charter of the city was forfeited by
the assumed misconduct of the magistrates and
parts of the citizens. Lord Corteret took the
affirmative Earl of Hay the negative. Amongst
the witnesses brought from Scotland were three
Judges. A debate arose as to the manner of
their examination, whether at the bar, the
table, or the woolsack. Some Scotch Lords
affirmed their right to be seated next the English Judges. Eventually they appeared
at the
bar in their robes. A bill was brought in to
disable Alexander Wilson, Esquire, from holding office in the magistracy in Edinburgh
or
elsewhere ; for imprisoning the said A. W. for
abolishing the guard and taking away the gate
of the western bow-port. The bill was sent
down to the Commons, a warm debate ensued,
Lord Polwarth said, among other things, [and
he (Mr. H.) thought it was suggestive,] 'If the
Government would lay their hands on their
hearts and ask themselves whether they would
vote in the manner they were about to do, had
the case of Edinburgh been that of Bristol,
York or Norwich ? He was persuaded they
would have required every title of their evidence to be proved.' The bill with some
amendments was sent back to the Lords and
passed.
In 1745, occurred the second rebellion,
headed by Prince Charles Edward. Its
short-lived success proved that Scotland
was anything but a quiet, happy, contented
country. If the union in those 38 years
which had expired since it became law, had
really accomplished any of the fine things
its advocates claimed for it, it was certainly
strange its value should have been so little
appreciated. Certainly peace, security and
contentment were not among the benefits it
had at that date conferred. McCulloch
further said :
"Sir John Cope defeated at Present Pans 6000
Dutch auxiliries commanded by Prince Charles
Edward, at Derby, 40 miles from London.
December, 1746, commenced with a retreat into
Scotland, and General Harding defeated at
Falkeith. In 1746, the rebels were defeated at
Culloden, [after which he (Mr. H.) read that] 'all
the jails of Great Britain, from the capital northward, were filled with unfortunate
captives.'
In May, the Duke of Cumberland advanced into
the Highlands, encamped near Fort Augustus,
and sent off detachments on all hands to hunt
down the fugitives and lay waste the country
with fire and sword. The castles of Glengarry
and Lochliel were plundered an burned ; every
house, hut or habitation met the same fate. All
the cattle and provisions were carried off. The
men were either shot upon the mountains like
wild beasts or put to death in cold blood, without form of trial. The women, after
having
seen their husbands and fathers murdered,
were subjected to brutal violations and then
turned out naked, with their children, to starve
on the barren heaths. One whole family was
inclosed in a barn and burned."
"In a few days," says Smollet, "neither
house, cottage, man, nor beast could be
found in a compass of fifty miles." The
union was consummated in 1710, and Smollet, page 90, vol. 2d, states that in 1713,
three years after:
"During the adjournment of the Parliament,
on account of the Whitsun-holidays, the Scots
of both Houses, laying aside all party distinctions, met and deliberated on this subject.
They deputed the Duke of Argyle, the Early of
Mar, Mr. Lockhart, and Mr. Cockburn, to lay
their grievances before the Queen. They represented that their countrymen bore with
impatience the violation of some articles of the
Union ; and that the imposition of such an
insupportable burthen as the malt tax would,
in all probability, prompt them to declare the
Union dissolved. The Queen, alarmed at this
remonstrance, answered that she wished they
might not have cause to repent of such a precipitate resolution, but she would endeavor
to
make all things easy. On the first day of June,
the Earl of Finolater in the House of Peers
represented that the Scottish nation was aggrieved in many instances ; they were deprived
of a privy council, and subjected to the English
laws in case of treason ; that their nobles were
rendered incapable of being created British
Peers ; and that now they were oppressed with
the insupportable burden of a malt tax, when
they had reason to expect they should reap the
benefits of peace. He therefore moved that leave
might be given to bring in a Bill for dissolving
the Union.
He (Mr. H.) would, however, pass over
the events of 1715, which might very
properly be termed the first rebellion,
and therefore, an unfavorable moment
to look at Scotland, and turn to what the
Rev. Dr. Playfair said was the condition
of the country thirty-eight years after
the union:
"Since the year 1745, a fortunate epoch for
Scotland, in general, improvements have been
carried on with great ardor and success. At that
time the state of the country was rude beyne
description. The most fertile tracts were wastes,
or indifferently cultivated. The education, manners, dress, furniture and tables of
the gentry
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
130
were not so liberal, decent and sumptuous as
those of ordinary farmers are at present. The
common people, clothed in the coarsest garb and
starving on the meanest fare, live in despicable
huts with their cattle. Their half-ploughed
fields yielded but scanty crops. Manufacturers
scarcely existed amongst them, and improvements
culture were of a more recent date. Peas,
grass, turnips or potatoes were not then raised ;
no cattle were fattened ; and very little grain
was exported. Oats and barley were alternately
sown, and during seven months in the year, the
best soil was ranged by flocks of sheep, a certain
number of which were annually sold and carried
off to be fed on richer pastures."
McCulloch states : —
"At the period referred to no manufactures,
with the exception of that of linen, had been introduced into Scotland. Its agriculture
was in
the most wretched state imaginable, and the inhabitants were miserably supplied. even
in the
best years, with food, and were every now and
then exposed to all the horrors of famine. The
details already laid before the reader have shown
the extreme prevalence of outrage and disorder
in England in the sixteenth century; but Scotland
was a prey to the same sort of disorders so late as
the end of the seventeenth and the beginning of the
eighteenth centuries."
He (Mr. Howlan) thought, after the
proofs he had given respecting the state
of Scotland from 1710 to 1745 , that the
statement made by the hon. Leader of
the Opposition, in 1866, when speaking
of the union of Scotland will England,
vanished into thin air. That hon. member than said: -—
"That, from the period of its accomplishment,
there was awakened in Scotland a spirit of industry
and enterprise formerly unknown in that industry
and ever since the two kingdoms of England and
Scotland, incalculably to their mutual benefit," &c.
He (Mr. H .) could not regard such
statements in any other light than that of
taking an unwarrantable liberty with
history for the purpose of hood-winking
the people of this Island. He (Mr. H.)
had taken more pains to show the effect
which the union had upon Scotland than
with Ireland, because some people supposed that nothing would satisfy the
people. of the latter country. But the
impartial reader of history would admit
that promises were made to Ireland, before it went into union with England,
and that her people have had many grievous wrongs to complain of and yet until Mr.
Gladstone arose to take hold of
those causes of discontent, it could not
be said that an honest effort had ever
been put forth to rectify those wrongs,
and if Mr. Gladstone succeeded in settling
those long-vexed questions, he would
deserve the approbation of every honest
mind; and he thought the lessons of
history were those from which that hon.
committee were warranted to draw deductions for their guidance ; and believed
the lessons there taught showed that before we spoke of union our land question
should be first settled, when the question
of confederation could be approached
with more freedom. He thought the experience of New Brunswick should teach
this Colony a lesson, and the following
from the St. John Telegraph he would
read:
"It would be interesting to learn why it is
that New Brunswick influence counts for nothing
at Ottawa. Why is it that we have no proper- weight or influence in the Government
? How
is it that the PREMIER dares to propound measures to his Cabinet which he knows our
representatives can only accept with humiliation ? Is
it because they do not take a proper stand or
are divided in sentiment, or why is it ? We have
cordially and heartily supported the Government,
and encouraged the New Brunswick members to
do the same, in cases not a few, but we would a
thousand times rather see our representatives in
and out of the Government opposing it, with all
their might, than to have our just demands
treated with contempt, and our cherished privileges wrested from us without the slightest
regard to our feelings or wishes, and without any
necessity for so doing .
"Our correspondent tells us that the New
Brunswick members, with one or two exceptions,
will stand by the ballot, as we know they will by
the currency resolutions, but that it will be all
in vain. Why is this ? We can explain. New
Brunswick has gone in loyally for Confederation.
Her public men have not spouted treason, nor
heeded explosive and disloyal political combinations. They have not threatened an
appeal to a
foreign nation. ' What and next ? ' They
have not taken advantage of the fears or necessities of the Dominion to drive a hard
bargain.
These are the reasons why they are to be humiliated and injured ! 0r, perhaps, it
is to teach a
lesson to Prince Edward Island. That Island is
keenly alive to what is passing' in New Brunswick. . [illegible] The Government professes
to be
very hearty' in promoting a union between that
Island and Canada. And how does it proceed ?
It says by its actions, which speak louder than
words that any concessions, reasonable or unreasonable, may be made and offered to
a province so long as it remains out of the Union, or
even all but in arms against it, if within its
bounds. But let a Province be loyal and true to
the Union, let its influence be cast in that
direction, at whatever sacrifice, and the Government will treat it and its representatives
as so
many ciphers. Its most reasonable demands
will be refused and its most cherished privileges
will be swept away without the slightest compunction ! A fine Union lesson this for
Prince
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
131
Edward Island ! Yet it is the lesson which the
Government are now busily teaching and the
one which the Island will not be slow to learn.
"'The currency resolutions will not be
pressed.' Of course not ! That might offend
the anti-confederate bankers and brokers. The
taking away of the ballot "will be pressed," but
who cares that New Brunswick is offended and
indignant ? And then a tax is to be placed on
three or four articles which New Brunswick cannot produced. She is to pay tribute
on the right
hand and on the left, and to bring her into a
pleasant humor to do so, she is not to have the
currency assimilated, and she is to lose the
ballot !
"There is one consolation. We know well
why we are thus treated. So much injury and
contumely would never be heaped upon us if we
had been less loyal and less subservient. A more
cowardly policy it would be difficult to conceive.
It is that of men who imagine that they know
when to bully and when to bribe, and know little
more. Perhaps they do not know even quite so
much, and may yet live to discover that by their
ungrateful, unjust and humiliating treatment of
New Brunswick, they have committed a crime
and a blunder. We hope yet to see that lesson
brought home to them in a manner which they
will never forget. "
The Patriot of March 28th, commenting upon New Brunswick affairs, says: —
"In 1868, the total revenue of the local government of New Brunswick, was $826,587,
and
the expenditure $618,514. In 1869, the whole
income (including a balance from the year before )
was $747,572, and the expenditure $634,582. "
The St. John Globe says :—
"The available income for 1870 is set down at
$433,938, and the expenditure $432,391, leaving
a balance of $1,547, in favor the Government,
but as the current expenditure of 1869 was
$474,325, we do not believe that that of 1870
will fall short of this amount, particularly as
there is to be a general election, which will cost
largely in itself, and will require heavy subsidies
to aid Government supporters
"The balance which the Government pretends
to have on hand is, we believe, fictitious, and
the Province, ln a year at least,will be reduced
to its last dollar. In 1871 a new census will be
taken, and if there will be found to be any addition to the population eighty cents
per head will
be allowed for each additional head,"
Now, if this was the experience of a
Province which had a railway and was
in receipt of the advantages flowing from
the prosperous trade which was carried
on by that means of conveyance last
year - which, upon the whole, was a
prosperous one - and yet if after a fair
trial of confederation, her people were
forced to conclusion that they would
have to resort to local taxation to meet
their public wants, he would leave that
hon. committee to say what our position
would be had we become a part of the
Dominion when that Province did. With
respect to their currency, there had long
been a rivalry existing between Nova
Scotia and New Brunswick on that question. There difference between the currency of
the two Provinces was about
2.5 per cent, and Nova Scotia was likely
to have her policy carried rather than
New Brunswick ; hence the Telegraph
enquired why that Province had no
weight, why the remonstrances of her
public men were unheeded at Ottawa.
Having reviewed the matter from a political stand-point, he would now look at its
statistical aspect, and here he would
merely say that he thought the statement
of the statistical report of the Union
committee, recently published in Charlottetown, would show that the terms
proposed were unjust to this Colony. He
would therefore read the following extract:
"That the proposed grant of $800,000 as an
alleged equivalent for the lands taken from us
for Imperial purposes, and for the purchase of
the remaining Proprietary Estates, is but a very
small compensation as compared with the value
of the Lands and Royalties reserved by the other
Provinces for local purposes, and yielding a large
annual income.
"The grants and allowances to us—save and
except by the small amount which would be derived from the increase in our population,
until
it reaches 400,000, of 80 cents a head - would be
a fixed sum, quite insufficient to provide for the
construction of such public improvements as are
indispensable to our advancement.
"It must also be borne in mind that the Government in the application of the grant
for the
purchase of the remaining Proprietary Lands,
would find that the fund from the sale of those
Lands would not be self-sustaining, as much
higher prices would have to be paid for them
than heretofore. A large potions of the unsettled or wild land, would not realize
one-half the
price at which it could be acquired ; this loss,
and the expense of managing the land depart—
ment we absorb more than one-half of the
sum to be granted. The working of the Worrell and some of the other Estates bought
by the
Government fully warrants this conclusion.
"That to surrender our Revenue, which under
our present Tariff has doubled itself within the
last fourteen years, and may reasonably be expected to increase in a still greater
ratio for
many years to come, would leave us at no distant period with an income so small as
to be
much below the actual requirements of the
Colony, and in a financial position inferior to
that of other Provinces of the Dominion.
"The Committee would further observe that
by the 92d Sect. of the Union Act, this Island
would not be entitled to any grants from the
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
132
Dominion Parliament for any local Public Works,
such as Canals and Railways ; inasmuch as from
its isolated position it would be excluded as not
coming within this stipulations of the Act, which
declares "that such works if local, must be declared
by the Parliament of Canada to be for the general
advantage of Canada or for the advantage of two
or more of the Provinces."
He (Mr. H.) might here say that this
portion of the report met all his views
on the matter. He would now turn to
what was looked upon by some as the
"glory argument," and if in this view
of the subject we were to be guided by
enlightened and experienced statesmen,
we should pay attention to what they
said. Earl Carnarvon, who was in office
when confederation was being carried,
said:—
"England ought to be proud of her colonies,
and should do all that in her lay to strengthen
the feeling which happily existed between Great
Britain and her colonies in all parts of the world ;
but that if the connection was severed the political effect would be that the North
American
Colonies would be left to the memory of any set of
privateers, in the case of a war breaking out with
the United States."
Such were the sentiments uttered by the
noble Earl, and he (Mr. H.) thought
those views did not just now place confederation in a flattering position ; and
if we entered into a federal union with
Canada we would immediately be called
upon to take up the policy of defending
ourselves. On this Mr. Lowe said:—
"We ought, in my opinion, to tell Canada that
we will defend her with all our strength, that we
consider her interests bound up with ours, that
we will fight for her to the last, as long as she
belongs to us, but that we see no chance of defending her on her own ground. IF she
chooses
British connexion she must take it subject to this
condition ; we should also represent to her that
it is perfectly open to her to establish herself as
an independent republic ; it is our duty, too, to
represent to her that if after well-weighed consideration she thinks it more to her
interest to
join the great American Republic itself, it is the
duty of Canada to deliberate for her own interests
and happiness."
This clearly showed that we would be
called upon to defend ourselves if we
were confederated with Canada; and,
moreover, it was worthy of note that
since confederation had taken place the
Imperial Government had been carrying
out that policy. At the time the union
was consummated, there were in the
Dominion about 12,000 troops, which
had been gradually withdrawn, until the
number was now reduced to about 8000,
and that they were to be entirely with
drawn he inferred from the following
statement of Earl Granville:—
"Last year we made further reduction, giving
the Government of the Dominion fair notice that
a very short time would elapse before we should
carry out that policy to the fullest extent. It
would be out of place for me now to anticipate
what may be said in a few days bu the Secretary
of War in moving the army estimates ; but I
quite admit that the general tendency of our
policy is to leave a country like Canada containing 4,000,000 of brave people the
duty of self- defence."
Therefore, it was that he did not see
what inducement there was for the people of this Island to change their positon.
He believed there was no situation in
which this Colony could be placed that
her people would be more centented and
happy than they were at present. In
every respect we occupied a more
enviable position than our neighbours.
Last year, it was said that a man could
hardly have a warrant in his possession
until it was called in, and why? Just
because the Government was prepared
to redeem its paper at the Treasury. Our
debt was, to speak in round numbers,
£150,000, and when our public lands
were allowed for, we had at least £100,
000 to place against that amount, which
would reduce our real debt to about ten
shillings a head for the population of the
Island ; but if we placed to our credit, as
they did in the Dominion, all our public
works and public buildings, our debt
would be more than fully met. In the
matter of trade, our position was encouraging. Our exports, in round numbers, for
the past year were £865,191,
and our imports, £864,282, so that the
balance of trade was now turning in our
favor ; and he held when a country commenced thus to turn the scale, that her
prosperity would advance from that period more rapidly than it did before.
Under a tariff of eleven per cent, we paid
£22,000 for education, and had £23,000
in the Treasury and in the two Banks.
After paying all the expense and expenditure of the past year, notwithstanding
that the markets for oats and other produce were so low, still our revenue exceeded
the expenditure by nearly £9000.
We had our two Houses of Legislature,
and all the benefits, privileges and advantages of a free people. Hon. gentlemen would
also bear in mind that there
was no way for us to go but by the voice
of our people as expressed by themselves
at the polls, and through their representatives in the Legislature. The question
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
133
was one of the most important any people could be called upon the consider—
even the changing, to a great extent, of
their position as it now was, and in a
measure transferring to others a power
which we now enjoyed ourselves. He
would move the following resolution:—
Whereas the people of this Island value
highly the powers and privileges which, as a
Colony of the British empire, they now exercise
and enjoy:
And whereas this Island having prospered
under the constitution granted it by the parent
country, its inhabitants are exceedingly averse
to any change in their political condition which
would take the management of the affairs of
the Colony out of their hands, and place them
under the control of a distant government:
And whereas this House believes that a union
of this Island with the Dominion of Canada, as
proposed in a minute of the Privy Council of
Canada, dated 14th Dec., 1869, would be inimical to the best interests of the Colony:
Therefore, Resolved, That this House cannot
entertain the said proposals of the Dominion
Government, and consequently approves of the
general tenor of the Reply of the Executive
Government of this Island, as expressed in
their minutes of Council, dated respectively the
7th day of Jan. and the 4th day of Feb., 1870.
Mr. BRECKEN did not rise to respond to
the extraordinary historical statements of
the hon. Leader of the Government ; but
he might remark that he could not ascertain from that hon. member's lengthy
speech, nor from the resolution which he
had proposed what position he intended to
occupy—whether he was a no-terms man
or the reverse. He (Mr. B.) might also say
in a general way with respect to the correspondence before this hon. committee, that
it was not what he expected. He thought
this House would have been furnished
with memoranda and the Canadian delegates
while on their visit here last summer. It
was true there was on the table a minute of
council, dated 7th of January, and a more
lengthy one dated the 4th of February ;
but it was well known that the delegates
were here in the month of August. The
House had heard nothing of the arguments
with which the members of the Government sought to enlighten the delegates on
the claims of this Colony ; all that was before the committee were those minutes of
council, which he supposed had been prepared after the Government had ascertained
the opinions of the country. But he
did not rise to reply to the speech with
which this debate had been, opened or to
anticipate the hon. Leader of the Opposition, Certain changes had been made
against him (Mr. B. which he felt called
upon to rebut. A member of the Government had said he (Mr. B.) ought to resign his
seat, if his prevent views on this question
were different from those which he had held
when elected, and the taunt had afterwards
been taken up by the hon. member for Tryon,
Another hon. member had accused him of
being willing to sell his birthright for a
mess of pottage. If he (Mr. B.) were to
be guilty of such an act, he feared that he
would fare worse than even Esau, for Esau
received his pottage, but where he (Mr. B.)
was to get his, God only knew. He had
been sold in this House, and through the
columns of the press, that he had violated
his public pledges on the hustings and
elsewhere. Who the writer was that
attacked him in the newspapers, he knew
not, for he was unacquainted with his style.
Anonymous writing was sometimes justifiable, but when a constituent attacked his
representative, he should put his name to
his correspondence. He (Mr. B.) in replying to his opponents would use as few
names as possible of those not on the floor
of this House. At the
dejeuner given to
the Governor General when the delegates
were her, he was called upon to reply to
some toast, and he then stated that the
people of this colony had no prejudices to
overcome, but that this was a young country,
and the opposition to union chiefly arose
from the belief that we would lose the
control of our own affairs. After the
delegates were at Quebec, and the scheme
then agreed upon came down to the Legislature, we were told that it was of the
nature of a treaty—that it could not be
altered, no not so much as to dot and or
cross a t. Believing this to be the aspect
of the question as it was then under consideration, when the no-terms resolutions
were submitted by the Hon. J.C. Pope, he
gave them his support, though he stated at
the time that he did not approve of their
wording. About that time Nova Scotia
had been unfairly dealt with by her representatives, and he was unwilling that any
one
should have the opportunity of putting this
Colony into confederation on the terms of
the Quebec scheme, though he expressed
the belief that terms could be offered which
we might accept. In supporting the no- terms resolutions, he might be accused of
insincerity, but he thought it right to stand
by the country, and he would support
them again were he placed in a similar
position. As reference had chosen made in
this public papers to the reflection of the
Hon. Daniel Davies at the late election, he
might be excused for alluding to the subject here. Mr. Davies did not approve of
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
134
the Quebec scheme, but he was in favor of
the principle of union, and therefore voted
against the no-terms resolutions. It was
asserted that he had not been put in
nomination because he was a confederate.
The assertion was not true. Mr. Davies,
than whom there had never been a more
honest and faithful representative, had
been very unfairly treated, and that by a
clique who opposed him on the ground of
his being too much under the influence of
Mr. W. H. Pope. This was the reason
of their action, and the hon. leader of the
Opposition knew what he was stating to be
a fact. To prove that those persons could
not be opposed to Mr. Davies on account
of his confederate principles, he (Mr. B.)
need only refer to the circumstance that
spins of the same individuals who were instrumental in bringing forward another
candidate in his place, recorded their votes
for the hon. member for Georgetown (Mr.
Haviland) who was known to be a "red-hot
unionist." These men supported one who
was always ready to fight for union, even
for the Quebec scheme, yet the would not
trust Mr. Davies, who only admitted the
principle, and advocated our entering confederation when we received fair terms.
Having proved his point in regard to his
position at the last election, he (Mr. B.)
would now turn to some of the other
charges made against him and here he
would remark that the malignity of his
accusers was only exceeded by their stupidity. Did they not know that a general
election was coming on, and that then he
would have to appear before the people ?
Yet, in view of all this, they had the effrontery to tell him that if he did not choose
to
hold his tongue, he should leave the House.
Was a member of parliament a mere delegate or a representative ? This was the
point to be considered, and he would quote
high authority to show that members
should act out their convictions as to what
was right and not to be swayed by the
passing considerations of the hour. He
would give an extract from the speech of
Edmund Burke to the electors of Bristol,
in 1780, which was one of the most celebrated ever uttered by a public man. Burke
said :—
"If we degrade and deprave their minds by
servility, it will be absurd to expect that they
who are creeping and abject towards us will
ever be bold and incorruptible asserters of our
freedom against the most seducing and the
most formidable of all powers. No! Human
nature is not so formed nor shall we improve the
faculties or better the morals of public men, by
our possession of the most infallible receipt in
the world for making cheats and hypocrites.
Let me say, with plainness, I, who am no
longer in a public character, that if, by a fair,
by an indulgent, by a gentlemanly behavior to
our representatives, we do not give confidence
to their minds, and a liberal scope to their understandings, if we do not permit our
members
to act upon a very enlarged view of things, we
shall, at length, infallibly degrade our national
representation into a confused and shuffling
bustle of local agency. When the popular
member is narrowed in his views, and rendered
timid in his proceedings, the service of the
crown will be the sole nursery of the statesman. Among the frolics of the court it
may
take that of attending to its business. Then
the monopoly of mental power will be added to
the power of all other kinds it possesses. On
the side of the people there will be nothing but
impotence, for ignorance is impotence; narrowness of mind is impotence, and makes all
other qualities that go along with it impotent
and useless."
Upon these sentiments a distinguished man
had remarked :—
"The voice of posterity has decided in Mr.
Burke's favor upon the principle here discussed, and the wonder is that these masterly
reasonings should ever have been necessary in
defence of such political principles."
Now, the position of Burke was this, he
went into parliament opposed to certain
measures, and while there voted to carry
them. But he (Mr. B.) was differently
situated ; he would not vote itself in this
House to carry confederation. No, his
conscience would not allow him to do it.
He would give no man an opportunity to
point to his son and say your father was a
traitor. Those political purists who had
been attempting to assail his consistency,
he thought would now have good reason to
feel ashamed of themselves. His views on
this question were scarcely different from
those of some members of the Government,
but because he had the manliness to come
forward and avow his sentiments, he was
made the object of petty, contemptible
newspaper attacks. Some of the ablest
statesman of Britain had changed their
opinions on most important questions, and
a verdict of public opinion in their own
time as well as of posterity had justified
them in the course they had pursued. Sir
Robert Peel who had upheld the protectionist policy, violated his pledge when he found
it opposed to the true interests of his
country, adopted free trade principles, made
his bow to the landed gentry, and took for
his companions Cobden and Bright. Hear
what he said in his famous speech on the
Corn Laws, delivered on the 4th of May,
1846 :—
"I admit, Sir, that those who have intuitive
perception to tell them that which is right in
respect to matters relating to commercial policy ;
I admit, Sir, that those who, after patient and
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER.
135
deliberate consideration, adopt at once the right
course, are much more entitled to the credit
attending such a course of policy than others
who, at a later period of life, adopt their sentiments. But it is the duty of those
who have
reason to change their opinions to have the
manliness to come forward and own their convictions. Sir, I think it is dishonest
for a man,
after being convinced upon a particular subject,
to endeavor to gain credit for consistency, by
being unwilling or afraid to admit the change.
I admit that this alteration in my opinions may
disentitle me to the noble Lord's confidence ;
but I must recollect that the question for the
country is not a personal one. It is not a
question as to what period a man has changed,
or ought to change his political opinions. The
real question is: Are these measures consistent
with justice and sound policy? That, Sir, is the
only question we have now to consider. If you
blame me for not having discovered sooner the
necessity of such a measure as the present, you
may say that this circumstance disentitles me
to your confidence; but that will not enable you
to escape the necessity of arguing this question
on account of personal imputations. Are these
restrictions politic and just? I have no hesitation in saying I do not think they
are consistent with justice."
He (Mr. B.) would also read an extract from
Sir James Graham's speech, at Carlisle, in
1859, in reply to the taunt of being a
weather-cock :—
"Now something is said about change of
opinion. The last half century has been the
period of my active life. Within that period all
has changed around me. I have seen the face
of nature changed. I have seen morasses converted into dry ground. I have seen desert
wastes in this country now teeming with golden
harvests. I have seen grass supplanting
heather, and running up to the tops of our
highest hills. I have seen night turned into
day in our cities and dwellings by the aid of
gas. I have seen time and distance all but
annihilated by the locomotive power of steam
by sea and land. I have seen the electric
telegraph conveying from pole to pole the intercourse of man by a spark stolen, as
it were,
from Heaven. I have seen mighty monarchies
fall. I have seen republics founded on their
ruins crumbling to dust. I have seen despotic
tyrannies arise and fall. And shall man, frail
man, amid all those changes of nature and of
policy, alone stand immoveable, unaltered in
his opinions, and say he is unchanged? Is he
to refuse to yield to the pressure of the times
and of the circumstances in which his lot is
cast, if he is not open to conviction? I, frail in
my judgment, but honest in my purpose, have
changed many opinions; but to say that a man
dealing with state affairs is not to change his
opinions under any circumstances—that may be
a recommendation for any deliberative
assembly in the world."
Those were noble utterances, and they fell
from one whose change of opinions was one
of the most remarkable instances of the
kind on record, for by it he forfeited the
confidence of Dukes and Earls. But he
(Mr. B.) would tell the political purist he
had another example, that of no less a personage than the late Lord Palmerston, a
statesman who swayed the House of Commons almost at his will. Hear what he
said when taunted with changing his opinions :—
"Public men may change their opinions upon
questions of great public importance without
any other motive than an honorable one. I
will say a noble regard for their country's
good."
Having given these examples to show that
politicians were often justified in changing
their opinions, he (Mr. B.) would trouble
this hon. committee no longer. On some
future occasion he would have an opportunity to refer to the documents on the
table. He had risen to defend himself from
the aspersions of his opponents; but he felt
restrained by the rules of the house from
properly characterizing one who, under a
nom de plume, had vented upon him his
malignity. What, he would ask, should be
done with such a purist ? He would say,
pass him over to some political bird-stuffer;
in one hand place his own vile productions,
and in the other these extracts on this independence of representatives which he
(Mr. B.) had just read. And when this was
done, where should he be put? In this
building we were to have an apartment for
specimens of Island ornithology. Let him
be given a position there ; but where in the
collection should he be placed? Beside the
hawk? No, he would not disgrace the
noble, courageous bird with such company.
Beside the humming bird? No, he would
not soil his fair plumage with the unseemly
contact. Where then in all the group
should the character be perched? Where,
he would again ask? Put him side by side
with the unsightly owl, that was his only
fitting place ! (Prolonged Applause.)
Hon. COL. SECRETARY said the hon. member for Charlottetown had treated the
committee to a most extraordinary speech.
He had not advanced one argument in favor
of confederation. His remarks were wholly
of a personal character and had nothing to
do with the subject under consideration.
After a few explanations from Mr Brecken and others, the debate was adjourned.
This individual participated in:
