1870 PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER. 219
Monday, April 11
220
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER 1870
Confederation.
House again in committee on the
further consideration of Despatches.
Mr.McLEAN considered it imperative
on every independent representative of
the people in the House to express his
candid opinion on the great and all-
absorbing topic of confederation. It was
a question of the greatest importance ; in
fact the most momentous that had been
discussed in this House for years ; for on
its decision depended, in a measure, the
future prosperity or ruin, the weal or
woe of the inhabitants of the Island.
We were now a free and independent
people —free to make our own laws and
disburse our own revenues, but were
we confederated with the Dominion our
condition would be very different—our
general laws would be framed almost
entirely by men who knew very little
about us, and were unacquainted with
our circumstances or requirements ; our
revenue would be disbursed by a government many hundreds of miles from
us, and we should be taxed at the discretion of that government. He (Mr.
McL.) would like to see the free and
glorious constitution of our little Island
handed down to posterity. Did any
hon member require proof of the evils of
confederation? Look' at the once beautiful and classic land of Greece, which,
for lack of an independent spirit in her
people, became enslaved, and that country in which was once centred nearly all
the refinement and literature of the
1870 PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER. 221
world, was now scarcely ever spoken of.
And if the people of this Island did not
manfully maintain their independence,
they too would become enslaved. If we turned to the great Germanic Confederation,
and there beheld the disastrous
effects of union, it should be a warning
to us. One of its effects was the great
struggle which took place there a few
years ago, in which hundreds of thousands of men were arrayed against each
other in deadly hostility. In the
United States of America, confederation
was the cause of the battles which
covered the country with rain and desolation, and deluged it with human blood. Washington
foresaw the difficulties which would arise between the different sections of the Republic,
and in his farewell address prophesied the great struggle which took place. He (Mr.
McL.) the jealousy which existed between the
North and the South. The Southern
peole were opposed to the bounties paid
to Northern fishing vessels, and this was
one great cause of the discontent and
dissatisfaction which existed. They had
different interests, and so it was with the
Dominion—the Interests of the maritime
provinces were totally different from those
of Canada, which would give rise to
continual jealousy and discontent. The
history of Scotland had been frequently
referred to during this debate, and the
hon member for Charlottetown (Mr.
Bracken) had stigmatized the Scottish
people as lawless and indolent. If the
people of Scotland were lawless, it was
because they were driven to desperation ;
and as regarded the charge of indolence,
every person was well aware that the
Scotch were a thriving, energetic people,
and that they always sustained a high
character in whatever country they happened to reside. The learned Leader of
the Opposition had quoted Knight's
History of Scotland, a history which
was well known to be unreliable. Knight
took his views of Scottish History
from Define, the author of Robinson Crusoe
and other such works. Sir Walter Scott's
history was very different from Knight's.
It was said that Scotland did not prosper
before union with England. Perhaps not,
but neither did she prosper for a considerable
time after it. There was continual strife between the people of Scotland and those
of
England, and between 1707,1745, a period of
38 years,there were three rebellions, —one in
1815, another in 1823, and a third in 1845.
So much had been said about the union of
Ireland and England, that very little farther
remained to be added, but be (Mr. McL.)
would just remark that when that union
was consummated, it was an understanding
that Ireland was to have a separate exchequer, but that part of the agreement
was not fulfilled. The public debt of Ireland at that time, was £26,000,000, while
that of England was £420,000,000, and
Ireland had to bear her share of both debts
combined, which was a piece of gross injustice. It had been argued that the Irish
Parliament was corrupt, but, if so, what
made it corrupt? English gold. To
turn to the proposed union of this
Island with the Dominion of Canada, it
appeared to him (Mr McL.) that no terms
which Canada could offer would be an
equivalent for the loss of our liberties.
The Dominion government might order us
what terms they liked, because if they had
us in the union, my would then have the
power of taxing us at their own discretion.
and could take from us more than we had
received from them. It had been stated
that if we joined the Dominion, the proprietary lands would all be purchased, and
rent paying, which had been so long a
curse to the Island, would cease forever ;
but if those who were freed from from the
thraldom of rent paying would be obliged,
in the event of confederation, to pay more
in taxes than they now paid in rent, it was
difficult to see how their condition would
be improved. He (Mr. McL.) would like
to hear from the hon. leader of the Opposition, and also from the hon. member for
Charlottetown, (Mr. Brecken) their reasons for changing their views on this great
subject. When men in such high positions
changed their minds on a great question,
the public should know what induced them
to do so. It appeared from the speeches
of the Hon. Mr. Haviland, the present
leader of the Opposition, that in 1864 he
entertained very different views on the
question of confederation from what he
had expressed during this debate. The
following were some extracts from that
hon. member's speeches:—
" It was urged this morning, as an argument
in favor of the union, that, the event of a
cessation of the present civil war in the States,
we would be powerless against a northern
army, or against the forces of the restored union. If that be the only argument
which can be advanced by the advocates of the
suggested association, their position is weak
indeed; for I ask what could the united colonies effect against the forces which could
be
brought at them? Assuming the population of the Canadas to be two and one-half
millionw, can it be expected that we could, in
case of invasion, offer successful resistance to
222 PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER. 1870
the disciplined armies, which a population exceeding twenty millions, would send forth?
The minds of hon. members may be seduced from a sober consideration of this question,
by the idea that we would be laying the foundatoions of a great country, and I admit
the influence of that feeling on my own mind last session, But, Sir, i confess a change
has come o'er ther spirit of my dream. What benefits are we to reap from the proposed
reunion, for we were united up to 1769? New Brunswick has a large funded debt, in
comparison to which our public liabilities, the fruitful subject of so much grumbling,
are mere matter of moonshine. The public debt of the Island amounts to not more than
£60,000 or £70,000, and we have the public domain to the credit of the country. Although
the resolution submitted does not commit this House to the expression of any opinion
on the subject of the union of the colonies, it is but right that the delegates, who
may be appointed as representatives of the Island, at the proposed conference, should
have their position fortified by the avowed sentiments of members of the Legis;ature,
that they should be able to tell the representatives of the sister colonies, what
are the feelings of those whom they represent. I am decidedly of opinion, that we
should, as an act of common courtesy, assent to the appointment of delegates, if for
no other purpose than that of hearing what propositions may be offered by representatives
of the other provinces. With this view, I shall support the resolution, but I entertain
very decided objections to the proposed union. * * * In his speech on the union
of the lower colonies, the Hon. Mr. Tupper, Provincial Secretary of Nova Scotia, said
that the time had not yet arrived for a union with Canada, because of the large debt
of that colony. "I thank thee, Jew, for reaching me that word." for the argument deduced
from it is applicable against our union with the other colonies. Canada is burdened
with a debt of more that sixty millions of dollars, and there is an annual deficit
in the revenue of a million. As to the idea attributed to the Imperial Government,
that these colonies are able to bear the burden of defending themselves against the
invasion of a foreign foe, the sooner Great Britain awakes from that dilusion the
better. * * * Our status, if united, would, I am bound to assume, be adjusted on the basis, either of territorial
area or numerical ratio of population. If the first criterion be adopted, we would
occupy a very inconsiderable position in the united Legislature. If our representation
is to be regulated by population, the official statistics on that point, afford but
little prospect of Prince Edward Island exercising much influence in the halls of
the united colonies. * * * We might expect to recieve the treatment that Scotland
and Ireland were subjected to whhen their separate Legislatures were abolished. *
* * At present the money we raise among ourselves is spent on the Island, and I
ask what guarantee have we that, once absorbed in the union, we may not have to pass
a budget framed to meet the railway charges of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick? I know
not what may result from this oventire, but I caution hon. members, that if they sell
their birthright they may expect their country to retrograde as Cape Breton has done
since her annexation to Nova Scotia. We have, at present, the system of self-government
and self-taxation, and if there be some defects in the practical working of our institutions,
it is 'better to bear the
ills we have, than to fly to others we know not of'. We have already an independent
judiciary, and if our professional men and their clients, should have to appear in
the great Supreme Court of Acadia, I do not see what improvement would be effected
by the change. At present we enjoy the advantages of the railways in the neighboring
provinces without the burden of the cost, and if we were prevented from these advantages,
I admit, an argument might be drawn in favor of the union, but it should also be borne
in mind, that the railway in New Brunswick derives a large amount of income from this
Island. * * * The hon. Col. Secretary told us that our internal communications
would be improved by the increased outlay which the revenue of the united colonies
could afford, and that capital would flow in on us after our separate constitution
should be merged in the union. As to the first argument, my impression is very decidedly
opposed to it, and I cannot concieve that our identification with other countries
deeply involved in debt, will have the effect of including men of wealth to invest
their property in the colony. The statistics of the Island, show that, without the
public lands, which they possess, without the Imperial expenditure for naval and military
purposes, which had been so abundantly, nay, lavishly, disbursed in Nova Scotia and
New Brunswick, we have thriven and advanced in material prosperity, as did the old
thirteen colonies, by our own unaided resources. The very first result of a union
with those provinces would be a uniform tariff; and while we hear complaints of our
present scale of duties, let it be remembered that in the neighbouring colonies, the
people are taxed far more heavily. In view of all these facts, I repeat the question,
what are we to gain by a union? Consider further, Mr. Chairman, the peculiarity which
would necessarily arise from our insular position. All who hear me, know that our
Colonial Legislatures meet in the winter season; and I ask hon. members on either
side, if they would fancy the idea of crossing the straits of Northumberland in January
or February, to attend to their Legislative duties. Sir, I believe this scheme has
been devised mpre in the interests of the ruling parties in the neighboring colonies
than in regard for those of the people. The Tilleys and Tuppers would fain have a
wider field for the exercise of their talents, and the extension of their sway, but
it is our duty to protect the rights of those whose reprentatives we are, aud what
public man will not hesitate ere he votes that our institutions shall become nonentites?
We have been told, and with truth, that Scotland prospered after, and in consequence
of her union with England, in 1707. There might be some cogency in the argument, if,
before the union, she had possessed free institutions; but such was not the case.
* * * The argument that we shall be materially benefited by forming a part of a
country which will count its population by millions, finds no acquiscence in my mind,
when I reflect in what Tell achieved for Switzerland against the most powerful nation
of his time."
There was, he (Mr. McL.) believed, a federal union between England and Ireland before
the union of their Parliaments, and also between Scotland and England, from 1707 to
1763.
1870 PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER. 223
Hon. Mr. HAVILAND said that hon
member for East Point had paid him the same compliment as the Leader of the Government
had done, namely, shown up his inconsistency; but unhappily they could not distinguish
the difference between a legislative and a federal union. It was a legislative union
that he (Mr. H.) had spoken against - a union which would annihilate our local legislature,
and the general government would have power over our local affairs. There was no federal
union between Ireland and England, nor yet between Scotland and England - they had
one king, but separate parliaments. the authenticity of Defoe's writings had been
called in question; but there was no man better able to write a history of Scotland
at the time of the union that Defoe, for he had been a commissioner in the secret
service of Queen Anne to bring about about that union.
Hon. Mr. HAVILAND.- It was a rash
assertion for the hon member (Mr. McLean) to state that every union of two countries
was disastrous, for he (Mr. H.) believed that constitutionally organized confederacies
had always been prosperous. if he (Mr. McLean) would go back to Phillip II of Spain,
he would find that a union of the seven provinces of Holland saved them from being
crushed under the iron heel of despotism, and made them one of the leading powers
of Europe. He (Mr. H.) thought the hon member from Alberton (Mr. Bell) would not agree
with the last speaker that the federal government of the united States was the cause
if the fractracidal war which devastated that country a few years ago. The idea of
the South going to war because a bounty was given to Northern fishermen, was too absurd
to be entertained. The cause of the struggle was slavery. Did the hon member get his
statement, that General Washinggton, in his farewell address, foretold the war which
took place, from history or from the jackals outside the House? General Washington
helped to frame the Constitutional, and would not run down what he helped to frame.
The hon member (Mr. McLean). He was winning his spurs, and seemed to be aspiring to
a seat in the Executive Council, and he (Mr. H.) would warn the Leader of the Government
to be on his guard lest he
(Mr. McLean) should, when he got
there, treat him like the young cuckoo did its fellow-nestlings — throw him out and
keep the nest to himself. I had been said that it was unconstitutional for a legislature
to vote against the people, as had been done in Nova Scotia; but he (Mr. H.) contended
that the legislature of Nova Scotia acted in a perfectly constitutional manner; but,
at the same time, he thought they acted unwisely in not appealing to the people on
the subject of confederation. British history was full of precedents for carrying
important measures without appealing to the people. The succession to the throne,
in the time of William and Mary, was changed by an Act of Parliament; and at the time
of the union of England and Scotland no appeal was made to the people. He (Mr. H.)
would now give the opinion of Sir Robert Peer on this subject in 1846, when he was
carrying the repeal of the Corn Laws through Parliament; and it was stated that he
and his party were returned to carry the Corn laws. At the same time he had quoted
the opinions of a greater statesman than himself, the second Pitt, on the question
of passing an Act to legislate Ireland into union, when some objection had been made
by the celebrated Sheridan
"Whatever may have been the circumstances that may have taken place at an election,
I never would sanction the view that any House of Commons is incompetent to entertain
any measure that is necessary for the well-being of the community. If you were to
admit that doctrine you would shake the foundations on which many of the best laws
are placed. Why, that doctrine was propounded at the time of the union between England
and Scotland. It was maintained in Ireland very vehemently, but it was not maintained
in this country by Mr. Fex. it was slightly adverted to by Mr. Sheridan at the time
when the message, with regard to the union, was delivered. Parliament had been elected
without the slightest reason to believe that its functions were to be fused and mixed
with those of another legislature, namely, the Irish Parliament, and Mr. Sheridan
slightly hinted it as an objection to the competency of Parliament Mr. pitt met that
objection at the instant in the following manner. Mr. Pitt said: The first objection
is what I heard alluded to by the hon. gentleman oppisite to me, when His Majesty's
message was brought down, namely, that the Parliament of Ireland is incompetent to
entertain and discuss the question, or, rather, to act upon the measure proposed,
without having previously obtained the consent of the people of Ireland - Their constituents.
This point, Sir, is of so much importance that I think that I
224 PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER. 1870
ought not to suffer the opportunity to pass,
without illustrating more fully what I mean. If the principle of the incompetency
of Parliament to the decision of the measure be admitted, or if it be contended that
Parliament has no legitimate authority to discuss and decide upon it, you will be
driven to the necessity of recognizing a principle, , the most dangerous that ever
was adopted in any civilized State- I mean that Parliament cannot adopt any measure
new in its nature, and of great importance, without appealing to the constituent and
delegating authority for directions. If that doctrine be true, look to what an extent
it will carry you. If such an argument could be set up and maintained you acted without
any legitimate authority when you created the principality of Wales. Every law that
Parliament passed without that appeal, either as to its own form and constitution,
as to qualification of the electors, or elected, as to the grand and fundamental point
of the succession to the Crown, was a breach of treaty, and an act of usurpation."
Mr. Pitt contended, therefore, that Parliament had a right to alter the succession
to the throne, to incorporate with itself another legislature, to disfranchise its
constituents, or to associate others with them. That was the constitutional rule laid
down by great authorities, but the authority and right of Parliament, was one thing
and the expediency of exercising that right, was another thing. It had been said that
the hon. member for Charlottetown, (Mr. Brecken) when he changed his opinions, should
either hold his tongue, or resign his seat, but he (Mr. B.) had quoted the opinions
of great statesmen on the other side of the Atlantic, in justification of his conduct.
He (Mr. H.) would now quote hon. Joseph Howe, as to the unconstitutional idea of calling
upon a member of Parliament to resign his seat. In Nova Scotia, in 1861, when Mr.
Howe was Prime Minister, several members who had been returned as conservatives, had
changed their political views, and, in consequence, petitions were poured into the
Government praying for a dissolution, and these petitions were answered by Lord Mulgrave,
and as Mr. Howe was his Prime Minister, it was Mr. Howe speaking through Lord Mulgrave.
The reasons assigned by the petitioners were that members were acting and voting contrary
to their own previously avowed principles, and contrary to the well known wishes of their constituents. In reply, the following
broad principles were laid down:-
"It is the undoubted principle of the British constitution, that a member once returned
byh a constituency, has to consider what he be
lieves to be the interests of the whole country, and not the single wishes of his own constituency. He is elected a Representative, and not a Delegate, and
the constituency have given up to him for the limited period fixed by law for the
duration of the Parliament, the power which they possessed. They have a right to represent
to him their views, and to refuse to re-elect him at the end of the Parliament if they are dissatisfied with his conduct, but they
have no right during the duration of the Parliament to coerce his actions, still less
have they the right to expect that the royal prerogative would be used, because they
are dissatisfied with the choice they have made."
Great fault had been found with the hon. member for Charlottetown (Mr. Brecken) for
changing his opinions on this subject, but he (Mr. H.) thought while members of the
government had such a large beam in their own eyes, they should not be so anxious
to get the mote out of the hon. member's eye. Hon. Mr. Haythorne the Premier of the
colony, had stated at a public meeting, that he was not a "no terms" man, and the
hon. member for Charlottetown had done no more. The hon. member for Bedeque (Mr. Laird)
had also spoken on the subject at Summerside, and he was not a "no terms" man. The
hon. member, Mr. Callbeck, should have put the figures, with which he favored the
House, into the celebrated minute of Council. The minute of Council admitted the principle
of confederation. The construction put upon it by Lord Granville was, that the only
obstacle to confederation was the settlement of the land question. The Government
seemed to have taken a lesson from Talleyrand, or Machiavelli, and put into this minute
of Council, words to hide the meaning. It was hard to tell what the government meant-
they were waiting with bated breath to ascertain the opinions of a majority of the
people.
MR. McLEAN did not expect that when the hon. Leader of the Opposition followed him, he would
enter into personalities. Some hon members appeared to wish to make themselves conspicuous
to persons in the gallaries. He (Mr. McL.) could not see that talking about Souris
and the wise men of the east had anything to do with the question before the Committee.
HON. MR. DUNCAN. - The hon leader of the Opposition, or rather the leader of the confederate party,
seemed to stand by the position which Howe had laid down that hon. members might change
their opinions. He (Mr. D.) thought it was one of the beauties of limited monarchical
government, that when the representatives of the people were
1870 PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER. 225
doing contrary to their wishes, the Crown dissolved the House, and sent them back
to the people. For example, in this Island, Sir Alexander Bannerman - though he (Mr.
D.) did not like it- once dissolved the House on the plea that it was acting contrary
to the wishes of the people. In Nova Scotia the Assembly carried confederation against
the desire of the people, but the governor did not dissolve that body, because he
himself was in favor of seeing the union scheme consummated. New Brunswick was constitutionally
dealt with; in that Province there was an appeal to the country. No doubt the Legislature
of Nova Scotia had the
power to alter the constitution without the consent of the people; still they had no right
to do such an act.
HON. MR. HAVILAND said there was no
analogy between the cases of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. In the latter Province,
Smith and his party resigned their seats in the government, and a new executive was
appointed which dissolved the House, and appealed to the people. In Nova Scotia, there
was no such resignation. The hon. member (Mr. Duncan) had in the course of his speech
the other night, read from a letter written in New Brunswick, complaining of the results
of confederation in that Province. He (Mr. H.) did not give the letter much attention,
as there were people in all countries opposed to change; but it seemed as if great
importance were attached to the epistle, for it had been published in the newspapers.
He would read something of a different character, namely an extract form a speech
made by a gentleman of position in St. John, and his statements could be set over
against those of the hon. member's letter. [The extract was here read but the Reporter
did not obtain a copy of it.] The hon. member for East Point, (Mr. McLean) had referred
to personalities, but for a young member, he (Mr. McL.) could be as personal as any
one in this House. Insinuations had also been made during this debate; the Queen's
Printer had said that all unions were brought about by gold. He (Mr. H.) would say
that all unions had also been opposed with gold. There was as much honor, he could
tell the hon. member, on this side of the House, as there was on the other side. This
question should be discussed on its own merits, and character left alone; neither
the character nor the patriotism of those around him would suffer by a comparison
with t hat of hon members opposite.
Mr. McNEILL said the hon member who had just spoken had gone far back, in some
of his authorities, for precedents to show that a parliament could destroy itself.
The cases which he quoted were like the treachery of Judas, beacons to prosperity.
After such examples being brought forward to establish the point that this House might
do away with the constitution of the Colony, he thought it was no wonder that some
people were preparing to swear their candidates at the next election. It was well
that the opinions which we had heard advanced by the hon and learned member for Georgetown
should go to the country; the people might judge of them for themselves.
Hon. Mr. HOWLAN was amused at the recommendation the hon. leader of the Opposition have in favor
of one of the authorities which he quoted, namely, that it was used in the education
of the royal family. Some person had said that one reason why princes were fools,
was because that they did not go to school with other boys. Defoe had also been given
as an authority. No wonder that he was in favor of union, for he had been employed
to aid in carrying it out. Jeffreys had likewise been quote,d but he (Mr. H.) would
not give much for his opinion, for he was a great tory.
Hon. Mr. HOWLAN.- The
Edinburgh Review, for which he wrote, was certainly a tory publication. But he (Mr. H.) would give
some authorities to meet those which had been quoted by the confederate members opposite.
He would read an extract from Erksine May's Constitutional History of England, to
show the corruption which existed in the English parliament about the time of the
Irish union. In vol. 1, p. 299 that writer says:-
"According to the law of Ireland, freeholds were created without the possession of
property; and the votes of the freeholders were considered as the absolute right of
the proprietors of the soil. Hence it was that after the union more than two-thirds
of the Irish members were returned, not by the people of Ireland, but by about fifty
or sixty influential patrons."
"According to a statement made by the Duke of Richmond in 1780, not more than 6000
men returned a clear majority of the House of Commons. It was alleged in the petition
of the Society of the Friends of the People presented by Mr. Grey, in 1793, that eighty-four
individuals returned 157 members to Parliament; that 70 influential men secured the
return of 150 members; and that in this manner 307 members- being the majority of
the House before the union with Ireland - were returned to Parlia
226 PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER. 1870
ment by 154 patrons, of whom 40 were peers.
In 1821 Mr. Lambtor stated that he was prepared to prove, by evidence at the bar of
the House of Commons, that 180 individuals returned, by nomination or otherwise, 850
members."
"There can be little doubt that the King
himself was cognizant of the bribery which, at this period, was systematically used
to secure Parliamentary support. Nay, more, he personally advised and recommended
it. Writing to Lord North, 16th Oct. 1779, he said: 'If the Duke of Northumberland
requires some gold pills for the election, it would be wrong not to satisfy him.'"
And as some hon. members in this House
appeared to have Macaulay on the brain, he (Mr. H) would also read an extract from
that author on this corruption. At page 164 of vol- he says:-
"The plague spot began to be visible and palpable in the days of the Cabal. Clifford,
the boldest and fiercest of the wicked five, had the merit of discovering that a noisy
patriot, whom it was no longer possible to send to prison, might be turned into a
courtier by a goldsmith's note. Clifford's example was followed by his successors.
It soon became a proverb that a Parliament resembled a pump. Often the wits said when
a pump appears to be dry, if a very small quantity of water is poured in, a great
quantity of water gushes out; and so, when a Parliament appears to be niggardly, ten
thousand pounds, judiciously given in bribes, will produce a million in supplies.
The evil was not diminished; nay, it was aggravated by that resolution which freed
our country from so many other evils."
"Honest Burret, with the uncourtly courage which distinguished him, ventured to remonstrate
with the King. 'Nobody,' William answered, 'hates bribery more than I, but I have
to do with a set of men who must be managed to this vile way, or not at all. I must
strain a point or the country is lost.'"
There were the opinions of Macaulay on this subject. Now, he (Mr. H.) might quote
from McCulloch, to show what the Irish had to endure. That writer, under the head
of Ireland, states:-
"The Treaty of Limerick, in 1691, between the Generals of Williams III and those of
James the II, guaranteed to the Irish Roman Catholics the same religious privileges
they had enjoyed during the reign of Charles the II. But this treaty was most shamefully
broken, and during the reigns of Anne, George I, and George II, a series of Acts were
passed, constituting what has been called the Catholic Penal Code, which had for its
object the extermination of the Roman Catholic religion in Ireland. It is unnecessary
to recapitulate the provisions of these statutes. Their spirit was succinctly and
truly described by Mr. Burke- 'The laws made in this Kingdom (Ireland) against papists,
were as bloody as any of those that had been enacted by the Popish princes and states,
they were worse- they were slow, cruel, outrageous in their nature, and kept men alive
only to insult in their persons
every one of the rights and feelings of humanity." - Letter to Sir H. Langrishe.
"Everybody knows that this atrocious code entirely failed of its object and that instead
of being exterminated the Roman Catholics gained new strength and vigor from the persecution
to which they were exposed.
"In the earlier part of the reign of George III, the leading statesmen of England
became alive to the impolicy and mischievous operation of parts, at least, of the
penal code, and its more offensive provisions were gradually repealed. In 1798 the
elective franchise was conceded to the Roman Catholics, but they continued down to
a comparatively late period, to be excluded from the privilege of having seats in
the legislature, of being members of corporations, and of holding numerous public
offices of trust and emolument."
At the time the union of Ireland with England was sought to be forwarded, not only
gold was employed, but the clergy were told that the church would be supported. After
the union was consummated, this promise was denied. Although corruption did its work
in the Irish parliament, there was material enough in the country to make it pure;
and with all its faults, that parliament did more for Ireland than it usually received
credit for. Grattan, page 39, says:-
"A Legislature, the parent of both countries he talks of a Legislature, as far as
relates to Ireland, free from the influence of vicinity of sympathy- the Isle of Man
is all that (free from the influence of duty directed by prejudices and unencumbered
by knowledge). In order to judge what this parental legislature would be, let us consider
what the British Parliament has been, and let us compare that parliament, for this
purpose, with the legislature of Ireland. In this comparison I do not mean to approve
all the parliaments that have sat in Ireland; I left the former parliament because
I condemned its proceedings; but I argue not like the minister from the misconduct
of one parliament against the being of parliament itself. I value that parliamentary
constitution by the average of its benefits, and I affirm that the blessings procured
by the Irish parliament in the last twenty years, are greater than all the blessing
afforded by British parliaments to Ireland for the last century; greater even than
the mischief inflicted on Ireland by British parliaments; greater than all the blessings
procured by those parliaments for their own country within that period; within that
time Legislature of England lost an empire, and the Legislature of Ireland a constitution.
This was Grattan's opinion of the Irish parliament at that time.
Mr. BRECKEN.- Will the hon. member make this clear? Why was it that such a parliament sold the
country?
1870 PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER. 227
Mr. BRECKEN.- How then could they be called an honorable body of men?
Hon. Mr. HOWLAN had only given Grattan's opinion; but he (Mr. H.) would say this, he would not accuse
the hon. member for Charlottetown of ever having read the history of Ireland. But
he would turn from the history argument to another aspect of the question. Our trade
with the Dominion was referred to as having increased. Since the abrogation of the
reciprocity treaty, our trade, of course, to a certain extent had turned into other
channels. But a great part of this increased trade to the Dominion was in pork, which
had only become an article of export, within the last few years. To show how some
branches of trade had sprung up here of late, and that the Colony was in a highly
prosperous state, he had prepared a few figures. Our exports in staple articles of
produce were for the following years, in bushels:
|
Oats. |
Potatoes. |
Barley. |
| 1849. |
231,339 |
,718 |
10,087 |
| 1850. |
1,111,961 |
465,360 |
97,935 |
| 1860. |
1,652,952 |
534,053 |
57,281 |
From 1849 to 1859 our people were largely engaged in shipbuilding, and neglected farming;
but from 1859 to 1869, much more attention was paid to agriculture, and let us note
the results:-
|
1849. |
1859. |
1869. |
Increase. |
| Butter, |
1/2 ton |
5 1/2 tons |
45 tons |
80 p. ct. |
| Eggs, |
0 bbl |
102 bbls |
5119 bbls |
500 " |
| Pork & Ham |
62 " |
1706 " |
9111 " |
530 " |
Follow this increase on for twenty years more, and what would be the state of our
trade? Add it to our hay, which, together with fat cattle, would very soon form a
considerable item, and we would have still greater results. Now all this had been
done with a banking capital of $3 1/4 per head of our population, while our neighbors
in the Dominion had $9 1/2 per head. There was scarcely any doubt but the prosperity
of the Island would go on at a still greater ratio. This colony might be said to be
a complete agricultural college and stock farm; and our farmers now were about the
graduating class. The log house of the new settlement was giving way to the more modern
and stylish house; and the tidy sitting room to the well-finished parlor, with its
accompaniments, in many instances of a melodeon or a piano. There was nothing in the
way of comfort that our people did not enjoy; we were not, therefore, in such a
position that any change must be for the better. We had an increasing revenue, which
it was acknowledged, would double itself every twelve years. But what was the state
of matters in the Dominion? The Upper Canadians were asking for a tariff of 20 per
cent, and the opening up of the North West. Before all the schemes which the Dominion
had undertaken were completed, he (Mr. H.) believed the tariff would be still higher
than 20 per cent. There had been a great deal of figuring as to what this Island would
gain or lose were we to accept the Better Terms. One set of financiers had pronounced
that these terms would be a gain of £23,000 to the Colony. Then we had a Tabular statement,
very ably prepared, but yet inaccurate, which showed that the Better Terms would give
some £12,000 to the credit of the Colony. In calculations of this kind, there must
be much about them which would be uncertain, but the committee that had prepared the
report in question had blundered sadly bout certain articles, such as rum, dry goods,
&c., which showed that they were not the ablest financiers. He (Mr. H.) had endeavored
to make a statement, but he had failed to bring it near either of those to which he
had referred. He would give it briefly, and the House and the country might judge
of it for themselves. The estimates of the Dominion, as just published, for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1871, was $23,915,917, from which deduct for the Intercolonial
Railway $6,000,000, which would leave $17,915,917. Our share of this amount, namely
the 40th part, would amount to about £140,000 currency. All that we would receive
in subsidies, salaries, &c., from the Dominion would be about £90,000, thus leaving
a loss to the Colony for the current year of some £50,000, which would go on increasing
as the taxation or expenses of the Dominion increased. After considering these figures
the thought no sensible person would think of going into confederation. He considered
it his duty to meet a statement of the hon. leader of the Opposition with respect
to the public accounts, when he was attempting to show that the finances of the Colony
were not in a satisfactory state. He said that the returns of the Land Office for
last year showed a balance of £154 on the wrong side of the books. This was a very
disingenuous way of stating the case. The money of that office had been taken for
other purposes, and it was not fair that all the interest in the accounts of that
office should be charged to it. The
228
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER. 1870
expenditure in connection therewith was
£8,636, but of that amount some £5,839
had been paid for interest ; £691, in money
refunded to settlers on the Selkirk estate,
and £250 for a claim on a format Cascumpec point. The hon. member for Charlottetown
had stated the other night, that
Scotchmen prosperedwherever they Went
all the world over. One would think from
the remarks of hon. members that Irishmen
never succeeded anywhere. He (Mr. H.)
could point to gentlemen in high positions,
such as the Governor General of India,
who were Irishmen. Then again with
respect to the Minute of Council, the example of Talleyrand had been quoted
—it had been got up to conceal the ideas,
of members of the government, as they did
not wish to commit themselves, until they
saw how public opinion would turn. The
first minute was dated the 7th January,
some days before the proposals of the Dominion Government were made public, consequently
it could not be said that the,
Executive waited to see what turn public
opinion would take in regard to them. The
members of the government entertained
the same ideas respecting the better terms
on the first day they saw them as they did
now. And he did not see how they could
arrive at any other opinions. Besides the
more extended Minute of Council of 4th
February did not differ in sentiment from
the short one prepared by a committee of
Council on the 7th January. He would
read an extract from the minute of 4th
February :—
"Some may consider it a matter of indifference
whether the money payment by which those
questions must eventually be settled, be provided
by the Dominion of Canada or by Great Britain.
But to accept the offer of eight hundred thousand
dollars, as a free gift from the Dominion, which
would not establish this Colony in a position as
regards Land Tenures and territorial Revenues,
similar to that occupied by the adjoining Provinces, yet the independence of the Island
would
thereby be compromised, and the Union question
would be discussed, and finally decided not upon
its intrinsic merits, but because it might become
the means of settling the Land Question, which
is of a totally different character. The Council
feels it to be their imperative duty to express
their conviction that no Union can prove successful and advantageous to the people
of British
North America, unless it be accomplished with
the free and unbiased consent and approval of
the contracting parties. England's own experience of the rebellious, the seditions
and the emigration which occurred during almost three
quarters of a century, which followed the two
unwelcome Unions of Scotland and Ireland, with
her, should warn her as well as the Dominion,
to pause ere they commit a similar error in
North America."
The government when they agreed upon
this paragraph had more particularly in
view the case of Nova Scotia. With respect to Ireland, some hon. members appeared
to think that her union with England was the best thing that ever happened
that country. If so Daniel O'Connell and
D'Arcy McGee must have been fools for
what they did. The minute of Council continues thus:—
"If, therefore, the duty of settling the Land
Question should be assumed by the Dominion,
the relations between her and the Island would
be ill-adapted to elicit a genuine expression of
opinion ; they would in fact, closely resemble
those which have heretofore subsisted in certain
British boroughs between candidates and a bribed
constituency.
"Even if a Union could be affected on the
terms proposed, it is obvious that the Representatives of Prince Edward Island would
occupy a
very invidicus position when voting in the Ottawa Parliament, more especially on questions
involving the use of Dominion funds, for the
purpose of reconciling the objections of other
Colonies to Confederation."
We see that at Ottawa this session, Hon.
Mr. Tilley was called the silent member,
because he could not get the policy which
was best for New Brunswick carried out.
And this Island would be in a still worse
position, especially if she accepted the
terms proposed. Hear what the St. John
Telegraph, of April 11, a union paper,
says about the new tariff of the Dominion,
and its effects upon New Brunswick :—
" But the duties on breadstuffs, coal, etc.,
would never have been imposed for purposes of
more revenue. They are protective duties pure
and simple, and are fitted to defeat the fiscal
policy of Canada, which has hitherto aimed at
making it a cheap country to live in, and to
manufacture goods in, so that we might build up
an export trade. The new policy, so far as it
goes, is in the opposite direction; it will certainly
compel us to pay more for flour—flour was more
firmly held on Saturday with upward tendencies
in consequence of the new tariff—it will limit our
choice of a market, and will virtually make us,
in New Brunswick, pay tribute to Ontario, without any compensating advantages. These
are
matters on which we should have supposed the
men we sent to Parliament to look after our interests would have had a good deal to
say. We
have yet to hear what they did say, or whether
they left the disagreeable duty of giving expression to the sentiments of their constituents
entirely to the newspapers."
The same paper speaking of the whole
management of Dominion affairs says :—
"Those who are best informed believe that we
1870 PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER. 229
have too many heads of departments, too many
deputy heads, too many clerks and that, altogether,
a little more economy, a little less extravagance in buildings and festivities and
in our general style of public house-keeping would be more becoming a
young nationality like Canada. Then, as to the
need of Revenue whence does it arise? According to the showing of the Government and
its
Finance Minister, it, for the most part, is enabled
to rejoice in a surplus. But this is not the fact.
It is a scandalous and most reprehensible perversion
of fact. By dragging into the Revenue account
large sums of money which do not belong to it—
sums of money which belong to 'capital' accounts or 'open' accounts—the Government
show a surplus of revenue over expenditure. Last year, it appears, our Government
had a revenue of over $600,000
from ' premium and discount !" But the principal part of this large revenue was derived
from
the premium which the Intercolonial Railway
loan was sold for, which loan and any premium
derived from its sale, ought to be sacredly devoted to one single object, namely,
that for which
it was obtained. So with several other items in
both sides of the account, an account which
shows that Canada, instead of making money by
'premium and discount', is paying the enormous
sum of over $280,000 a year to its banker, on this
side of the water, for 'managing' the public debt,
a duty which ought to be performed by the Finance Minister and his deputies and subordinates.
The Government thus leads the people to think
that no additional taxes are needed, especially as
the great public works are undertaken out of
revenue. This causes no little grumbling, and
allowing to the reprehensible and demoralizing
financial strategy of the Finance Minister.
"The facts are otherwise. The opening up of
the Northwest, the protection and management
of the Fisheries, the Census, the payment of the
interest on Provincial debts, largely increased by
Railway subsidies and outlays in Canals, and now
constituting the debt of Canada—these and other
expenditures connected with the material development of the country and the promotion of its best
interests, create a necessity for an increased revenue.
If these facts were frankly admitted, instead of
being concealed and misrepresented, and if all possible reductions were made in the
general expenditure, the people would not grumble. They would
rather give the Government a suitable revenue
than have it pay a quarter of a million of dollars
a year for 'managing' its debt; making forced
loans in several different forms, endangering the
convertibility of our currency and menacing us
with the degradation of ' shin-plasters.' "
This he (Mr. H.) thought was a state of
affairs which was by no means desirable.
He had, however, turned aside from the
minute of Council; he would next read the
paragraph relating to public works :—
"Second—the Council does not admit that
any responsibility with reference to the Land
Tenures (involving a free gift of money), properly attaches to the Dominion, but they
indicate as
one reason for the dislike to Confederation, which
so generally prevails, that the interests of the
Island with reference to Public Works, have
been overlooked, inasmuch as the ninety-second
clause of the North American Act defines local
works to he such as do not connect one Province
with another or others. And as the people of
this Island, if united to the Dominion, would
contribute largely, in proportion to their numbers, to the construction and maintenance
of
Public Works on the mainland, from the free use
of which their insular position would debar them,
it is, therefore, indispensable, if the Dominion
Government desires to recommend the question
of Union to the serious consideration of the people
of Prince Edward Island, that the clause referred
to should be declared not to apply to Public
Works, generally, in the Island, and particularly
to a trunk line of railway, connecting the three
principal outports with each other and the capital, such a railway being urgently
required."
This view of the Executive with respect to
public works would also bear investigation.
He might likewise go over the whole of the
minute of Council in the same way, and
nothing could be found in it of which the
government need be ashamed. We had
been told our voice would not be listened
to by the British Government, if we remained out of Union, and the fact that our
postage to and from the mother country
had not been lowered, at the time it was
granted to the Dominion, had been quoted
as an evidence of this. But when it appeared that said reduction of postage did
not apply to the Island, it was brought to
the notice of the Home authorities, who at
once agreed to extend it to this Island, and
ordered that it should go into operation on
the first of June next. So it seemed that
our applications were not altogether unheeded in Britain, notwithstanding that we
were no part of the Dominion. He (Mr.
H.) had taken up considerable time of the
committee, and would add no more at
present.
Mr. BRECKEN was not going to follow
the hon. member into figures, as the hon.
member was more at home than be (Mr.
B.) pretended to be. He (Mr. B.) would
first say that as the hon. member for
Souris, (Mr. McLean) came from where
the wise men once did, he seemed to
have no hesitation to rush in where wise
men would not even dare to tread; yet
he very much doubted if the hon. member, although he was from the east, had
the wisdom of those who presented
offerings to the Son of the Highest.
But as the hon. member was a young
man, he would merely say to him that if
he saw himself, politically, as others did,
he would not feel so politically proud of
230
PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER. 1870
his position. In saying this, he (Mr. B )
alluded to the remarks the hon. member
made about theopposition. He (Mr. B.)
believed when the better'terms came
down, the hon. member, Mr. Callbeck,
was enamoured with them. But the
hon. member was correct in what he
told the House; he retured to his chamber alone to peruse them, and afterwards
thought his first impression was but a
will-o'-the-wisp. But he believed the
the hon. member was, previous to that,
a confederate.
Hon. Mr. CALLBECK said he read the
proposals carefully before he gave expression to any opinion respecting them.
Mr. BRECKEN had a great deal of respect for the hon. gentleman, but thought
his. memory was faulty; and while he
did not think he would willingly express
that which was not correct, yet he could
not but think the hon. gentleman had
trimmed. He (Mr. B.) would merely
ask the hon. leader of the government,
in this House, in what position, as a
statesman, did he stand? There was
not one word in the minute of Council
respecting the commercial aspect of the
question, yet the hon. gentleman devoted
the greater portion of his long a eech, to
the commercial prospects whic he fancied were involved in the question to
the entire exclusion of that view of the
matter to which his attention should
have been directed. Statesman should
take a broader and more comprehensive
view of that important subject, than was
involved within the narrow view to
which the hon. gentleman had so elaborately drawn the attention of that hon.
committee. He (Mr. B.) despised the
attempt which had been made to prejudice Scotchmen against him, because
he said that at the time of the union,
Seotchmen, to a great extent, were a
lawless people. All knew that it was
not until 1745, that the administration
of justice could be fairly dispensed in
that country, and he would say now,
what he did on a former occasion, that
Scotchmeu, from that position, soon became, in every respect, the reverse of
what they formerly had been, and no
country in the world, considering its
area and population, could boast of as
many men occupying important positions in the world, as Scotland could.
Even the wise man from the East, he
meant the hon. member for Souris, was
a Scotchman. But as his hon. colleague
said, there was noanalogy between the
union of Scotland or Ireland, with that
existing between the Provinces of the
Dominion. The former was a legislative, the latter a federal one ; and hon.
members who reason from the effects of
the one; to show the probable results of
the other, ought to have more fully considered the question before they made
the statements they did. If this Island
went into confederation, and sent proper
men to represent her in the Dominion,
they would find that the island would
be as fairly treated as the upper Province.
Did not Mr. Tilley speak, and had he
not as much influence there as any man
from Ontario?
Hon. Mr. HOWLAN had seen a confederate paper, published in New Brunswick, which represented Mr. Tilley
as
the silent minister of New Brunswick.
Mr. BRECKEN.—He had been represented as the silent minister, as he
(Mr. B.) understood, simply because he
did not think proper, recently, to ye
expression to his opinions. But New
Brunswick never had a son better able
to maintain their rights, or one that she
should feel prouder of than Mr. Tilley.
He (Mr. B.) would like to see the government ta e up the question fairly, and
express their real sentiments without
reserve. Their children would consider
whether in the course they might then
pursue, they had attended to the true
interests of the country. He had been
compared to an Arnold, and told that he
should resign his seat, but be (Mr. B.)
felt there was a great principle at stake
in the question, and would not have been
true to himself, his constituents, or his
country, had he failed to give expression
to his views on the proposals which were
recently sent down to the government
by the Dominion, and did hope there
would have been public spirit enough in
the government to have given expression
to their opinions upon this nest on, but
instead of that, attacks ha been made
upon himself, and when such was the
case, he claimed the right of reply. All
kinds of questions ha been referred to
by the government, such as the army,
militia, and commerce, but Earl Granville's despatch had not been approached.
The hon. member was afraid of it, and
probably had good reasons.
Mr. BRECKEN Would tell the hon. member when he went into figures, after
signing the minute of Council, he had
1870 PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER. 231
forgotten his duty. But he did not wish
to severe upon the hon. member, for
it was a matter of small consequence to
this Island what the immediate advantages were which confederation might
confer. There was a nobler principle
involved, and one more worthy the attention of the statesmen of Prince Edward Island.
Progress was reported, when the House
adjourned until to-morrow.
This individual participated in:
