Legislative Assemblies of Alberta and Saskatchewan,
5 November 1896, Alberta and Saskatchewan Debates over Confederation with Canada.
5THE LEADER, THURSDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 5, 1896.
THE BILL OF RIGHTS.
The Assembly's Constitutional Memorial.
Reasons Given for an Increase of
Constitutional Powers—An
Executive Council vs. Executive Committee—Statement of
Present Shortage of Moneys.
The following is the Memorial to the
Governor-General in Council, adopted by
the Assembly, and which gave rise to the
"secession" debate which will be published later:
The Legislature Assembly begs leave to
present to Your Excellency a statement
of their constitutional and financial position, and to suggest such amendments in
the North-West Territorial Act and other
Acts affecting the Territories and such increase in their grant or subsidy, as will
enable them to fulfil the duties they are
called upon to perform for the proper
government of the North-West Territories in local matters.
They beg to remind you that at various
times petitions and memorials on these and
kindred subjects have been sent down to
Your Excellency, or to one or more of
your advisers.
They are glad to say that the Parliament of Canada has been willing partly to
accede from time to time to some of their
just requests, so that at present they exercise control over certain funds put at
the
disposal of the Lieutenant Governor of the
Territories, and have larger powers of
legislation; but they find that they are
not in a position to use the limited powers
they do possess to the best advantage, and
that their legislation on subjects coming
strictly within the duties of the Territorial
Assembly has not the necessary quality of
security or completeness. As, besides the
right of dissallowance which Your Excellency in Council possesses over their legislation
as well as over that of provinces,
the legislation of the Assembly is also
"subject to any Act of Parliament at any
time in force in the Territories." Parliament, consequently, often passes Acts
diminishing the legislative powers of the
Assembly over parts of subjects ostensibly
reserved for their control, and at other
times over-riding Ordinances passed by
them and approved of by Your Excellency
in Council. It is unnecessary to point
out how such concurrent powers will lead
to insecurity and conflict.
The Assembly is of opinion that to
remedy this undesirable state of affairs it
is not necessary to have recourse to the
granting of a full provincial status. They
believe that till the time arrives, which
may be at a not distant day, when the
Territories should be taken into Confederation (as one or more provinces) the passing
of a few amendments to the NorthWest Territories Act will allow them,
subject to disallowances of their Ordinances, "to exclusively make laws in relation
to matters" already within their legislative jurisdiction.
They believe that such amendments
should be supplemented by a few further
changes. While they do not ask for some
rights inherent to provinces, notably the
rights to raise money on the public credit,
the chartering of railways, and the administration of justice with relation to criminal
matters, they can see no good reason why
other privileges of a territorial or provincial nature should be withheld from their
administration. They may point out that
during the last five years they have exercised most of the rights of provincial
assemblies, and, in their opinion, have
proven themselves equal to the task.
They further are of opinion that the
time has come that their executive government should be put on a firmer basis by
substituting for the Executive Committee
an Executive Council.
The North-West Territories Act makes
provision for a Committee of the Assembly "to advise the Lieutenant Governor in
"relation to the expenditure of Territorial
"funds, and of such portion of any mon"eys appropriated by Parliament for the
"Territories, as the Lieutenant Governor
"is authorised to expend by and with the
"advice of the Legislative Assembly, or of
"any Committee thereof." But it does
not provide for any responsible body
whose business it should be to advise the
Lieutenant-Governor in Executive matters.
It is evident that the Assembly having
the power to vote money for distinct services should have the right to control the
proper carrying out of its intentions.
As in the present more developed state
of the country, which has as much or more
need for an intelligent administration and
supervision of its sources and requirements
as any other part of Canada, it is impossible for the Assembly to act as an executive
council; they have been obliged to
make provision in their several ordinances
to entrust the duty of administering their
laws to the Lieutenant-Governor, acting
by and with the advice and consent of the
committee, created by federal law for the
purpose of advising with relation to expenditure only. They cannot, however,
be sure that in taking the only possible
steps within their power to meet the
necessity, they have not exceeded their
powers. Besides, the present machinery
does not admit of development, as for
instance in the direction of division into
departments with responsible heads. The
Executive Committee also has not the
right to advise the Lieutenant-Governor
in matters not contained in the Ordinances, notably the appointment of Justices
of the Peace, and the convening and dissolving of an Assembly, &c., &c. And in
general, the Assembly is of opinion that
for purposes of government a permanent
committee of the House has no advantage
over an Executive Council. The first is a
creation without precedent to guide it and
lacks the well-defined constitutional status
which political development during a long
course of time in Great Britain and her
colonies has given to Executive Councils.
In view of the foregoing the Legislative
Assembly would, therefore, respectfully
recommend the following amendments to
be submitted to the Parliament of Canada
at its next sitting:
1. Amend the section of the N.W.T.
Act of 1891 (54 55 Vict) which is substited for sec. 13 of the N.W.T. Act, Chapter
50 R.S.C., so as to read:—
"The Legislative Assembly shall exclu"sively have power to make Ordinances
"for the government of the organised
"Territories in relation to the classes of
"subjects next hereinafter mentioned,
"that is to say."
Note—While Parliament cannot divest
itself of its paramount right of legislation
in the Territories, it is desirable that it
should not, as it has often done unintentionally, perhaps, by legislation partly or
wholly affecting the Territories, conflict
with existing Ordinances, unless such is
their distinct intention.
2. Add a clause to the N.W.T. Act giving power to the Assembly notwithstanding anything
in this Act, or any other Act
of the Parliament of Canada, to repeal the
"Territories Real Property Act," so far
as it applies to the organised Territories,
and also to re-enact the said Act or any
part of it, or substitute other provisions
in lieu thereof.
Note—Though it is within the competence of the Assembly to legislate with
regard to property and civil rights and
they necessarily passed Ordinances affecting real property, as among others, relating
to Mechanics' Liens, Expropriation of
Lands, Tax Sales, and other official sales,
the question must frequently arise in how
far such ordinances are in harmony with
the Territories Real Property Act or can
be enforced with due reference thereto.
3. Repeal section 17 of the N.W.T. Act
of 1894 and insert instead:
"There shall be a Council to aid and
"advise in the Government of the Terri"tories, to be styled 'The Executive
"Council of the Territories,' and such
"Council shall be composed of such per"sons and under such designations as the
"Lieutenant-Governor shall from time to
"time think fit."
4. Repeal sub-clause (c) of subsection
(7) of said section 13 re "Insurance Companies."
Note—There is no reason why the Assembly should not have power to incorporate insurance
companies with Territorial objects, notably, hail-insurance companies, stock insurance
companies, &c.
5. Insert a clause in the N.W.T. Act
giving to the Lieutenant-Governor in
Council the power to appoint Sheriffs,
Clerks of the Court, Deputy Sheriffs, and
Deputy Clerks of the Court, anything
contained in the Act notwithstanding.
Note—The N.W.T. Act states that the
Assembly may define by Ordinance the
powers, duties and obligations of Sheriffs
and Clerks, and their respective Deputies
(subsection 4 of section 8 of 1891) and may
determine the places where such Sheriffs
and Clerks shall appoint Deputies. The
Assembly also prescribes the fees which
are allowed these officers in civil matters
which constitute nearly all their emoluments. Notwithstanding the fact that the
Assembly makes provision for both the
duties and the payment of these officers
their appointment remains in the hands of
the Federal Government.
6. Insert, subject to conditions herein
after explained, the following sub-section:
"The establishment, maintenance and
"management of hospitals, asylums,
"charities and eleemosynary institutions
"in and for the Territories"; and
Repeal sections 103, 104 and 105 of
chapter 50 R.S.C., in so far as they are
inconsistent with the powers asked for.
Note—Lunatics from the Territories are
sent under an agreement expiring in 1898,
between the federal authorities and the
Province of Manitoba, to the asylums of
the province. At present there are in
such asylums 74 persons, costing one dollar per day.
The Assembly is of opinion that they
could perform such service as well and
more cheaply. On account of the extra
distances travelled by transport to Manitoba the expenses are increased. The Assembly,
however, would only desire to
undertake the care of lunatics if the
federal authorities would provide the
necessary buildings, and make such increase in the grant or subsidy as would
pay for the maintenance of patients and
staff.
As regards hospitals the Assembly do
already provide, as far as their insufficient
means allow, for the assistance of hospitals built and kept by private charity.
7. Repeal section 21 of the N.W.T.
Act of 1894 and introduce an Act respecting "Roads and Road Allowances in the
North-West Territories," with similar
provisions to those contained in chapter
49 R.S.C., respecting Roads and Road
Allowances in Manitoba.
Note—This would do away with the
uncertainties and difficulties now connected with the laying out and improving
roads and acquiring road by expropriation and it would give to the Assembly
the right to delegate such power to municipalities.
8. Add a clause giving to the Assembly
the power to repeal, alter, vary or reenact the provisions for appointment of
Justices of the Peace and their qualifications.
Note—Only an Executive belonging to
and being in touch with the Assembly
has the facilities for judging the necessity of appointments to the commission of
the Peace and the eligibility of the persons to be appointed. Section 7 of the
N.W.T. Act of 1894 provides a property
qualification for Justices of the Peace consisting in the ownership in fee simple
of
land of a certain value. In new settlements where few or not patents for homesteads
have been issued it is impossible to
find suitable persons who can be appointed.
9. Repeal section 16 of the N.W.T.
Act of 1888 and enact a clause giving the
Assembly complete control as regard to
appointment, duties and salary of the
Clerk of the Assembly.
FINANCES
Regarding the financial position of the
Territories the Assembly must reiterate
in part their memorial of January 1892:—
"That the necessities of local govern"ment in the North-West Territories de"mand that
instead of the annual vote by
"the Parliament of Canada of an indefin"ite sum for expenses of government, a
"fixed amount in the nature of a subsidy
"should be granted to the Territories,"
and "owing to the rapid increase of the
"population in the North-West the
"amount of subsidy should be fixed for a
"term of not more than four years."
The revenues of the Assembly are obtained from local sources and the grant
from the Parliament of Canada. As regards the local revenues they are and always will
be very slight as they are made
up of amounts received for granting
licenses for such occupations as the Assembly is allowed to regulate by legislation.
These revenues amounted in 1895 to 30,000 dollars. All the assets which the
Provinces [except Manitoba, which has
been compensated for the lack of them]
possess, are retained by the Parliament of
Canada, who own and administer, with
power to roll, or grant to railway companies, their public lands, their hay lands,
their timber and their minerals. The
Assembly, however, is expected to provide for educating the young, caring for
the sick and destitute, rendering the
country habitable by improving roads,
bridging rivers, protecting against prairie
fires, increasing the water suppply, etc.,
etc.
Owing to the vast area of the Territories and the widely scattered nature of
the settlement all the business of the
local government is rendered more expensive proportionately to population than in
any province. As regards roads this is
apparent, but with respect to schools it
will be found equally true. By considering that under the most favorable circumstances
less than half the area in each
township is available for homesteading
and that as a rule only a small amount is
taken up, it will not create surprise to see
that in 1895 it took 341 schools with 401
teachers to educate 11,972 enrolled pupils,
with a daily average attendance of 6,600,
and that out of these schools 223 were only open during the summer months with a
daily average attendance of 11.
The most cursory review of the increase
of population and the very small increase
during the same period of the grant from
Parliament for the government of the
Territories (which stands in the same position as the subsidies allowed to the provinces),
will afford a convincing proof of
the utter inadequacy of their resources.
In 1891 the population was 66 799, the
number of schools in operation was 224
(for that year no separate amount was
out at the disposal of the Assembly.
In 1892 the number of schools in operation was 237, and the Parliamentary
grant for government was $208,700
($193,200 and $15,500).
In 1895 the number of schools was 34.1
being an increase in four years of over 52
per cent.
In 1896 the population is 104,331 (10
per cent. per year added to census of 1894
being the ratio of increase between 1891
and 1894) and the grant from Parliament
is $242,879 (not including $25,000, supplementary vote to recoup the Assembly for
relief expenditure undertaken for and on
account of the Dominion Government),
being an increase in five years in population of 56 per cent, and in annual grant
during last four years of 16 per cent.
As the conditions of Government in the
Territories are somewhat analagous to
those in the Province of Manitoba, a comparison between the amount voted to the
Territories, and the amount, calculated on
the same items, on which the subsidy to
Manitoba is based, would be fair and just.
Such an amount would be determined on
the following considerations:
1. That the population of the Territories, according to the census of 1891, was
66,799 ; according to the census taken by
the North-West Mounted Police in 1894
it was 86,851, and that, according to that
ratio of increase, viz., thirty per cent., it
will be, in 1897, 112,906. That if treated on the same basis as Manitoba, according
to sub-section (b) of section 5 of chapter 46 R.S.C., the per capita grant would
be calculated on an approximate estimate
of the population two and a half years
from 1897, which at the known rate of increase (of ten per cent every year) would
be 141,132.
2. That on capita grant, therefore, the
amount would be at 80 cents a head on
141,132 the sum of $112,905.
3. That on debt account on a presumably actual population in 1897 of 112,906
the amount would be five per cent. on
$32 44 per head, making the sum of $183,133.
4. That a grant for the support of the
Governmetn and Legislature in Manitoba
of $50,000 is allowed, and that such a
grant for the Territories should at least
be as liberal, making the sum $50,000.
5. That as Manitoba has been held to
be entitled to an indemnity for the want
of public lands of $100,000, and as the
Territories have a stronger claim for compensation is as much as besides the land
grants to railways in and for the Territories, a great part of their public lands
have been given to railway companies in
aid of construction, not for the benefit of
the Territories, but
(a) For the general benefit of Canada,
and for the special benefit of the Eastern
Provinces and British Columbia.
(b) For railways constructed for and in
Manitoba for which no sufficient land
grant could be found within that province;
and
Inasmuch as a very much larger total
amount of land is retained in the Territories for the benefit of the whole Dominion
of Canada than the amount of land
retained in the much smaller province of
Manitoba ; and
As the province of Manitoba has been
given all lands designated as swamp
lands,
They feel they are entitled to a compaaratively larger amount than was allowed to
Manitoba, the exact figure of which they,
however, are not prepared to estimate until such time as they enter confederation.
If treated as regards a subsidy on a
similar system as Manitoba the Assembly
recognize that it would be just to deduct
from such calculated amount such sums as
would defray the expenses which they, as
a Territorial Government, are not called
upon to pay, notably the expense of the
administration of the criminal law:
On the other hand, they find that it has
been the practice of Palriament to charge
votes for Lieutenant-Governor's Office, the
Clerk of the Legislative Assembly, Legal
Adviser, Registrars of Land Titles Offices, the
up to the Territories without giving them
the control over such moneys. They believe that they could perform the services
for which such votes were given as well
and better, and that such service and votes
should be put under their control. They
also find that votes for services in unorganized territory (as for instance $5,000
for schools in such unorganized territory)
appear among votes for the North-West
Territories, increasing thereby the apparent liberality of Parliament towards them.
The Legislative Assembly believes that
with the foregoing requests for legislation
and for subsidy they have given good and
sufficient ground for your Excellency's
advisers to recommend to the Parliament
of Canada ot deal in a liberal spirit with
their just complaints:
And they will ever pray &c, &c.
4THE LEADER, THURSDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 13, 1896.
SECESSION
Shall the Territories Be
Divided?
The Debate in the Assembly on
the Constitutional Memorial — Dr. Brett Proposes the Principle of Secession of Alberta
— Insinger's Reply — Magrath for
Secession — Fearon Champions
Unity.
The Memorial to the Governor-General
in Council endorsed by the Assembly,
setting forth the position of the Territories and our immediate requirements, was
published in full in THE LEADER last
week. This week we commence the
report of the debate on the question. THE
LEADER possesses the only accurate and
complete report of this debate that exists
or was taken. It was probably the most
important debate that has taken place in
the Assembly for years, and, as such, is
deserving of the space which will be devoted to it:—
in moving that the House go into committee of the whole to consider the drafted
memorial from the special committee,
setting forth the legislate and financial
position of the Assembly, suggested that
if discussion were to take place on the
contents of the memorial, asking for Territorial autonomy as against provincial
autonomy, it would be better for it to
take place at once rather than in committee where questions of principle ought not
to be dealt with. Having already made a
lengthy speech regarding the subject, he
need say nothing now, except to express
his pleasure that the memorial practially
was along lines he had suggested.
(Banff) said he agreed the time for presenting the memorial had arrived. The
present question was probably the most
important the House had before it for consideration. While, however, it was
only a temporary measure the memorial asked
for, he was onle of those who believed the
time had come when they should with no
uncertain sound tell the Dominion Government, or indicate to them in what
position they would like the Territories
placed. He was not going to state that
the memorial should indicate that a more
radical change than was asked for therein
should take place at once. It was a serious
thing to too rapidly get to an advanced
condition if the conditions of the country
would not warrent it; still at the same
time it was equally bad that they should
linger along and not do that which they
considered was for the best advancement
of the country. In considering that
question they were called upon to consider
two great principles. In the first place
should they ask for responsible government, and if they did hould they ask it
for the Territories as a whole? He did
not think that was somehting they could
arrive at very suddenly, nor did he think
it was probably wise to take his ideas or
opinions on the matter, for everyone
should be prepared to give his own views,
and have good reasons for these views.
There was no use disguising the fact that if
the people of the Territories as a whole
were asked "Do you want the Territories
errected into a privince such as Ontario,
or any other province in the Dominion?"
he believed a large majority would at once
exclaim "No!" (Hear, hear.) That
answer would be very largely due to the
fact that many people were not sufficiently
educated on what it was really meant to get
provincial powers and to be established
into a province. Many people were
laboring under mistaken ideas with reference to the expenses that would naturally
attach to the erection of a province. Some
had the idea that immediately on the
erection of a province they would be
forced to form municipalities. That would
not be necessary. It was true that in
Manitoba and other provinces municipalities had been formed. British
Columbia, however, was an exception.
The Territories had just as much power
to-day in forming municipalities as they
would have, had they full responsible
government. In British Columbia they
had a less number of municipalities than
there were in the Territories.
Mr. Brett: So far as direct taxation is
concerned we possess all the powers to- day of direct taxation of any province of
the dominion. The direct taxation in
British Columbia was poll tax, and the
Territories could have the same thing.
But it did not follow that if the Territories were formed into a province, these
powers would be exercised any more than
now. He thought that would dispose of
that objection. There were sufficient
other considerations for them to think of
in debating their present conditions. Was
it going to be any advantage to them? If
it was going to cost more than now, if
they were going to have less money to
expend on the industries of the country,
and on improvements in the country,
under provincial formation of government,
that would probably be one of the strongest reasons that iw was not advisable. If
they were going to undertake a responsibility they did not think they could carry
out, that was probably another reason
why they should give it due consideration.
As the memorial sets out, they are not
now receiving as much money as they are
entitled to. It was fair to assume, then,
that so far as their financial position was
concerned they would be better off were
they in the form of a province, than they
are now. The next thing for consideration was, were they prepared to undertake the
responsibilities? He claimed
that the Territories, with the present
population, were as well qualified to
assume responsibility as was the province
of Manitoba, when she undertook full
provincial government — as was the province of British Columbia (hear, hear).
Another point was in what position would
it place the Territories with reference to
the making of laws? He believed in a
better. Another question was, had the
time arrived when they should take this
step? Some whould say the time had not
arrived because they were not strong
enough to assume the responsibilities.
They were not strong enough to go to the
Dominion Government and make a contract with them. He was not unmindful
of the fact that there was a great deal in
being strong. The stronger they were the
better bargain they could make.
But as he understood the matter in
which portion of the Domion had been
taken into confederation and established
as provinces, they entered in on a basis
which was stated in the British North
America Act and which no government
could go behind. If the Territories were
taken into confederation to-day they
would only received the same amount pre
capita as they would were they ten times
stronger. They would certainly receive
more as population grew for the expenses of
government. That amount was regulated
according to population. Manitoba received $35,000 for expenses of government, while
latterly a better arrange
ment was made them, and now they
get $50,000. The same thing would attach to the Territories. Another question
to consider was, — as to the amount of
money that should be claimed in lieu of
lands over which they had no control.
That resolved itself into the quesiton of
making a bargain. They could state an
amount they were willing to begin with,
and the bargain ned not be made in a
manner that finally settled it, so that
later they could go to the Dominion Government and ask for a greater amount in
lieu of their lands. Another objection, to
undertake great responsibilities now, was
that business was depressed, and we had
hard times; wait until there was a revival of trade, and so on. Times had been
bad all over the world, and the sooner
they could help themselves, all the sooner
they would relieve themselves of the depressed conditions. They would not, of
course, interfere with the cause that had
made the depression so general, but they
could during depressed times, — if they
had it within their power, — go on with
public works, do things that in other provinces were doing good for the people.
Thus, he said, they would be hastening
the time when they would not be suffering from the effects of these hard times.
The question of the Territories remaining
as they are must come to an end sometime, and it was for the House very
largely to determine whether it should
come now or be deferred. He believed
that so long as they curtailed their demands
simply to a portion of what they were
entitled to, they would receive less and
less every year. The time had come
when they should tell the Dominion Government in unmistakable terms that at
the expiration of this Assembly, — two
years hence, — they would expect full provincial powers would be given to the Territories,
either as a whole or divided. He
had state there were no provincial taxes
in Manitoba, nor would it be necessary to
have them here. He might be asked,—
In what way are you going to raise the
revenue to carry on the Government? In
the first place they would get a grant of
money sufficient for the expenses of
Government as they do in British Columbia. then they would have in their power the
collection of other taxes, license
fees, and so forth, as in British Columbia.
He would now refer more particularly to
Alberta. If provincial government would
be a good thing for the whole of the Territories, he claimed it would not be unfair
for a portion of the Territories to ask for
it. The time had come not only for the
Territories as a whole to ask for provincial powers, but is was high time something
should be done in the direction of
giving to the western portion of the Territories full provincial powers. The conditions
of the eastern and western portions of the Territories were quite different in many
respects. In the west there
were resources which would greatly assist
the country generally if properly developed. They had ranching, grain growing,
minerals, coal, industries in coal oil and
so on, which under proper conditions
would make that protion of the country
one of the richest, if not the richest part of
the whole of the Territories. With proper
railway facilities those cola fields would
immediately be go into active operation.
That would largely incrase the population in those parts. Those people would
furnish a local market for those who raised cattle, grain and vegatables to the
north of them. They had diversified interests there but that made them stronger
because they could deal with each other.
The benefits they would obtain from
having a provincial form of government
would be that they would have power to
to do as they thought best for the development of the country. Nearly every member
of that Assembly must have a feeling
of disappointment with reference to the
North-West Territories. They had been
standing still — marking time. He did
not think the best efforts had been made
in their behalf. The powers of the province would make them progress much
more rapidly than it had. British Columbia to-day was attracting the attention
of the world. They had not got the rich
mines in the western part of the Territories as in British Columbia, but they had
mines which if developed, they did not
know but what they might be as valuable
as those in British Columbia. The mines
being developed in British Columbia
would not be developed were it not
that the B.C. government had made good
roads, and so made it possible for the
people to get into the mountainous districts. Had British Columbia been dependent
year after year as the Territories
were, and asking for somehting and only
getting a small amount, that province
would not have progressed as it had done.
There was another thing which might be
an argument in support of his contention
for provincial powers for Alberta. There
was a good deal in a name. The name
"The Territories," had an altogether
different sone to intending immigrants
than that of a "province." They did not
dissociate in their minds the United States
territories from the North-West Territories. It was a cold, inhospitable name.
The Territories was thought ot be a land
of cold and snow for about two-thirds of
the year. He had heard many people say
the name was bad, and retarded immigration. People said they would try "a
province." It was a more civilized name,
— a more congenial name. Were they a
province, the name of "The province"
would enhance their chances of getting
immigrants above what they were now.
He hoped the House would amend the
terms of the memorial by recommending
to the Dominion Govenrment, that at the
expiration of thta Assembly the time
would have arrived when Alberta and
Athabasca should be erected into a province. he hoped the House would
remember he was speaking for Alberta.
Mr. Brett: I am speaking for that
portion as I understand it, and for that
portion where my interests lie. Some
might say, Why ask for Alberta to be set
apart? The eastern and western parts
of Assiniboia had not such a large population as Alberta.
Mr. Insinger: No, no; the hon. gentleman is very much out there.
Mr. Brett thought if the hon. member
would carry out the figures as they wre
in the memorial he would find that Albert
ta had a larger population that the
Assiniboias. No, (continued Mr. Brett,
looking at a paper crowded with figures)
the two Assiniboias hat a pupulation of
about 10 per cent. more than Alberta,
carrying out the figures on the same lines
as was done in the memorial. Some
might say, why have not Assiniboia and
Saskatchewan asked to be made into a
province? He had never seen a stronger
appeal made than Saskatchewan was making some time ago for some form of provincial
government. He would now speak
for Alberta as he understood it; not for
the whole of Alberta but a portion of it.
Mr. Brett, continuing, said if they
would look at the increase of population
as figured out in the memorial they would
find out that in the years 1891-94 it was
57 per cent., much larger than in Assiniboia.
Mr. Page: Does the hon. member contend that the increase has been the same
during the last two years, that it was
during the three preceding years?
Dr. Brett replied that the was discussing
a memorial which had been placed before
the House, and he dared say it had been
prepared very carefully and with due regard to absolute correctness.
Mr. Brett: Yes, that is certainly Territorial increase, but if in 1891-94 Alberta
increased 57 per cent. there was no reason
to his mind, why that incrase had not
gone on since then. The increase of 40
per cent. claimed for the whole of the
Territories in the memorial was based on
the figures that Alberta had increased 57
per cent., Eastern Assiniboia 35 per cent.,
Western Assiniboia 24 per cent., Saskatchewan 33 per cent Taking that as a
basis the increase during 1891-97 would
be Alberta 90 per cent., the two Assiniboias 92 per cent., and Saskatchewan 110
per cent.
Mr. Insinger: How does the hon. member compute these calculations out of the
memorial? I know a little about the
figures there, and I don't see how under
any cicrumstances the deductions can be
drawn from the memorial. The increases
in the memorial are based on the whole
population, but to jump from that to the
incrase that happened in different parts
is something a little absurd.
Mr. Brett answred that he would stand
accused of being absurd, — but the figures
showed a general increase in 1892-95 of
57 per cent., and in the Territories of 40
per cent., and there was no reason to show
that Alberta had not increased as much
since. He obtained his figures in the
office, and he believed they were absolutely correct. They were from the census
returns taken by the N.W.M. Police. If
the hon gentleman who composed the
committee to draft the memorial were
warranted in saying that the whole of the
Territories had increased at the rate of
40, that was ten per cent a year, it was
fair to assume, in the absence of anything
to the contrary, that Alberta had increased in the same rate since 1894 (Hear,
hear) That was a fair thing. He might
appear ridiculous, but he certainly didn't
realized to a very large extent that he was
ridiculous in make a computation of
that kind. He was simply giving a reason, why, as a representative of Alberta,
he was justified in asking the House to
indicate to the Dominion Government
that the time had arrived when it and
Athabasca should be set apart as a province by itself. While the population
was increasing, and they had been getting
an increased grant year by year, it was
found that Alberta had been contributing
much more to the local revenues than
other parts of the Territories. Of the
total revenue contributed by the Territories (30,040) Alberta contributed 56 per
cent, and eastern and western Assiniboia 37
per cent. that made only 93 per cent. The
other portions was made up of moneys he
could not compute. Alberta contributed
a good deal more than all the rest of the
Territories. He would give a few items.
The liquor license was $24,907. Of that,
Alberta contributed $25,178; the balance
of the Territories showed $9,729. that
showed Alberta contributed the most,
(Laughter, and an hon. member: "And
it is a sign of progress!") The cost of
collecting that $9,729 in the two Assiniboias and Saskatchewan was $4,076, so
that the new amount contributed by
those portions was $5,652; while to
collect $15,178 in Alberta it only cost
$1,849, so in that respect Alberta's net
contribution was $13,329. Looking at it
in that way Alberta contributed 78 per
cent. of the net revenues of the Territories. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) He
knew those figures were rather startling.
(Renewed laughter.)
Mr. Haultain: What is the magnificent
total of the revenue?
Mr. Brett; The magnificent total of
the revenue is $30,040.
Mr. Brett: For licenses under the
Liquor Ordinance, the only item I can
give the hon. gentleman, the gross revenue is $24,908. The expenditure attending the
collection of that is $5,926, leaving a net revenue of $18,982. That is
outside the expenses of the chief license
inspector and so on. In it were not included the meetings of the commissioners, and
so on. Proceeding, the hon. gentleman
remareked, some might say the magnificent
sum, as the hon. member for Macleod
called it, was only $30,040, but even in
that small amount if there was a very large
disparity between the amount contributed
by one partner in the firm with the
amount he got out of it, he was justified
in looking around for some remedy.
Someone might ask, what if Alberta did
contribute 78 per cent of the net revenue,
what had that to do with it? Noting, if
78 per cent. was spent in Alberta of the
firm's money. But they found that Alberta came out at the wrong end there.
Last year Alberta received about 30 per
cent. of the full amount paid for schools
in the Territories. It might be said,
whose fault was that? If Alberta had
had a greater number of schools established she would have had a larger proportion
of the money. He presumed that as many
schools were required were established
there; he did not know anything to the
contrary. then the expense of spending
that money was five times greater in
Assiniboia and Saskatchewan than in
Alberta. Then on roads and bridges Alberta had had a little over one-third the
total money, having contributed over
three-fourths of the net revenues from
local sources.
Mr. Haultain: The net revenue expended upon roads and bridges?
Mr. Brett: No. While Alberta had
contributed over three-fourths of the new
local revenue, they had received less than
one-third in schools and only a trifle over
a third in the full amount expended for
roads and bridges. that condition of
affairs justified him, as one representative
of Alberta, to ask that Alberta should be
relieved, and placed in a position of collecting its own revenues and doing as it
liked. In conclusion the hon. member
further argued that Alberta was entitled
to provincial status on the ground of excess in increase of population, and also of
extent of acreage. He could understand
it was not going to be an easy matter to
get the sanction of the House. It was
not anything the House would voluntarily
tender to Alberta. He did not think the
Territories were sufficiently tired of Alberta, or sufficiently discontented with
the
part Alberta played with reference to the
contributions to the general fund and so
on. He could not readily understand, as
was always the case in secession, or one
part seeking to be relieved from another
portion, there always would be some objection taken. But he thought the time
would soon come when there would be
unanimity of feeling that the course he
proposed was the best thing not only for
Alberta but also for several portions of
the Territories to be constructed into a
province. (Hear, hear.)
(Yorkton) remarked that certain reasons
were given a week or more ago by the
hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Ross)
why it was necessary to reconsider their
position with regard to their constitutional status. It was stated that their powers
were not sufficient, and that the powers
they had been ostensibly given were incomplete. The hon. member further
brought on the point which whould appeal
more strongly to the House, perhaps, than
anything else, that they should ask for
more money. That was a very tangible
question, and appealed not only to members of that House but to every man in
this country. If they could in justice put
in a claim for more funds from the Dominion Parliament, if they could show
that the Territories were entitled to receive more from the Dominion treasury,
they would be remiss in their duty if they
did not make some kind of a claim. He
believed the present to be a favorable time
to reconsider their position. As early as
1885 they made a similar petition, but
then they hadn't the same knowledge no r
the same experiences of legislation. The
requests they then made were premature.
When they asked for responsibility in
1885 and 1888 they asked for something
that probably had they get it they would
not have been in a position to use. But
they had now been administering the
affairs of this country nearly as much as
any of the provinces, and he thought they
could claim to have administered those
affairs, with no discredit to themselves,
and quite as well as the affairs of any province were administered. He therefore
thought they could put in a good claim,
with a good conscience, to the Dominion
Government for more powers and for more
funds. There was another reason why
to-day they were in a better position than
formerly. There had been a change of
Government on a certain date in June.
He did not want to say for a moment
that one side of the House was more favorable to the Territories than the
other side, and it was well known that
many members of the present Government, when in opposition, made propositions to give
the Territories more powers
than had been given them. Mr. Davies,
now a member of the Government at
Ottawa in 1893 declared that it was the
duty of the Government in amending the
North-West Territories Act to give them
certain rights wholesale,—not to quibble
about and take back with one hand what
they give with the other. He (Mr. Insinger) — thought they could now go
to the Cabinet and remind its members of
certain statements made by them when in
opposition. They had now a member in
the House at Ottawa, who was more able
than any member they had had there be
fore, to present the claims of the Territories before Parliament. He referred to
Mr. Oliver. It was not only his ability,
but by his long experience he was better
posted on the requirements of this country, on their laws and general constitutional
standing, than perhaps any other
member of that House. Then, too, he
was with the Territories on the present
question. But to proceed. A certain
day was appointed to draft a memorial to
consider the matter and to bring in a report accordingly. The mover of the motion
(Mr. Ross) made a speech in which
he laid down the lines in which he thought
the House should restrict itself in asking
for Territorial autonomy, and he gave his
reasons therefor. Every one in the
House thought they were in unison with
the expressions of the hon. member for
Moose Jaw. These members who it now
seemed were not kept silent and by their
silence assented in the expressions of the
hon. member for Moose Jaw. But as
soon as the committee met it was found
that that unanimity did not remain, and
from many parts came different opinions
upon the subject. He was not sorry that
that was so. It was made apparent there
were three possible propositions that
could be laid before the House. One
was to make one province of the whole of
the Territories and ask for full provincial
rights. Another proposition was to
divide the country into more than one
province, and make one province of Alberta; the third proposition was to ask
that the powers they already had should
be completed and put beyond doubt, and
ask for more money, — or Territorial autonomy. He did not intend to follow the
hon. member and calculations, because he
simply couldn't. He did not think it
possible to follow the hon. gentleman into
anything that went to the bottom of his
heart, and that touched his sensibilities
keenly, because then his imagination ran
a little wild. The hon. gentleman at first
seemed to be under the impression that I
was rather premature to ask provincial
rights, but he blossomed slowly out into a
champion for provincial rights of the
Territories, and then he bloomed right
out into a champion for Alberta being
made into a province. He based his
claim on the consideration of the local
revenues; that a very large part came
from Alberta, and a very small part went
to Alberta. He showed that they had
more liquor drunk in Alberta, and that
there were more criminals in Alberta, and
that there were more people contributing
to the local revenue in Alberta by means
of fines.
Mr. Brett: What I did point out was
this, that the greater amount contributed
by fines came from the rest of the Territories. Out of about $400, only $40 came
from Alberta.
Mr. Insinger was very glad to hear the
disclaimer by the hon. gentleman. There
was more hope for Alberta than the hon.
member had given hope for. It struck
him (Mr. Insinger) as a very peculiar
claim that Alberta should be held out by
one of its representatives as being a place
where more liquor was drunk than anywhere else. Then the hon. member
pointed to the schools. Certainly it was
a very strange claim to put forward that
Alberta was a more ignorant place than
any other part of the Territories. (Laughter.) The hon. gentleman had shown
that population had it creased in Alberta,
and he must know that the establishment
of schools would always be a few years
behind the incoming of the population.
So if the hon. member would only rest his
soul in patience, say for a year or so, he
(Mr. Insinger) had sufficient confidence in
the intelligence of the people of Alberta
to believe they would have the full number of schools, and that they would before
long make a full drain upon the Territorial resources for payment of schools.
Another claim for the autonomy of Alberta was made on the ground of population. The
hon. member went into points
which he clearly did not understand, and
the parts he did understand he clearly
did not comprehend. (Laughter.) Any
body who knew Alberta knew what the
hon. member for Banff ought to know,
but did not seem to know, namely, that
in Alberta, they had special immigration
in the years 1891-94, and that that special
immigration there is not going on now.
Mr. Insinger: It may be going on, but
if so, it is a very silent trend. What we
hear is only the rumbling of the wheels,
as it were, of the people who are going
out. (Laughter.) Still he believed there
always would be a certain number of people going into Alberta, but the calculation
made by the hon. member was utterly
wrong, and he knew it, or he ought to
know it. He must know that on the building of the colonization railroad there was
a large influx of population, and that that
influx had stopped. So the large increase
shown to have taken place then had not
continued. Then the hon. member ought
to know, and he did know, that of the increase of population that went in during
those few years quite a number had gone
out, and the hon. member did know that
the population of Alberta had not increased in the same ratio in the last few
years as it had increased before. He (Mr.
Insinger) must therefore refuse to believe
any conclusions based on the hon. member ought not to make claims for rights
from the Dominion Parliament based on
figures which he knew were belied by
facts. Were the Assembly to allow that
to be done, it would make them the
laughing stock of the whole country.
When the hon. member speaks about the
development of industries, he must know
that in one large Territory they had more
industries, and of course larger chances of
development and would have more power
of development, and would have more
credit for their developments than any
particular portion of it would have. He
did not want to create an impression in
the mind of the hon. member that he
(the speaker) did not fully realize the
great importance and richness of Alberta.
There was no doubt that it was one of the
fairest parts they had, but that was not a
sufficient reason why it should be separat
ed from the rest of the Territories. Indeed it was a very good reason it should
stay in with the rest. But really the
point upon which the hon. member put
the most stress was because of his, well,
call it sentimental reason; — the sentimental reason that the idea in the minds of
intending immigrants was that the Territories was a country of continual snow.
How a territory should create an impression of snow he could not see, but he did
know that Alberta would create an impression of snow upon the mountains in
the mind of anyone who knew anything
about it. Why did not the territories in
the United States create an impression
of snow in the United States? There was
this difference between the territories, and
it was to our advantage, that this side the
border the Territories had the rights of
provinces, and on the other side the Territories had not the rights of the states.
But if there really was anything in the
sentimental, and the main, reason of the
hon. gentleman, and if it would act as a
balm to soothe the wounds of his bleeding
heart, he (Mr. Insinger) saw no reason
why the conceding so small a thing as the
change of a name should not be granted.
He did not object to have the name
"Territories" taken away, and to calling
the whole of this country Alberta. If any
little thing like that would satisfy the
hon. gentleman he would have no more
objection to the Territories being tacked
on to Alberta than he would to Alberta being tacked on to the Territories. (Hear,
hear.) By that, sentiment might be appeased and the hon. gentleman's heart
by at rest for a little time. He
(Mr. Insinger) had never yet met the immigrant who was scared from coming into
this country because it was a
Territory. He found as a rule
that when people came to this country they knew very little about it at all.
They knew that they came to America, and
if they were very clever they knew they
were coming to Canada, and that was
about the extent of their knowledge. He
was sorry the hon. member stated an
amendment might be brought in, but that
he was not going to bring it in now. This
was the proper time to bring in any
amendment if the amendment was drafted, for really, to give "home rule" to Alberta
was an amendment which attacked
the principle of the memorial. The memorial was drafted for the distinct purpose
of obtaining Territorial autonomy and
would not fit on to a province of Alberta.
It would certainly expedite matters if the
hon. member for Banff would bring on
his amendment in the full House. It
showed a certain amount of want of courage in not bringing his amendment down
to the full House when particularly asked
by the mover of the memorial to do so.
If it was meant that by becoming a province they should have the right of chartering
railways, that was a matter for
serious consideration. The hon. member
for Banff had spoken about making a contract, or bargain, with the Dominion
Government. On going to the Dominion Government, say they made a
contract, and a contract was supposed to
be binding. For the hon. member
to say they could enter into a contract
and consider the contract would only bind
the other side simply showed that the
hon. member did not know what the
word "contract" meant. The question
was, were they sufficiently strong to go
into the position to make a full contract,
and if they had the full power to make
these demands? Unless they had sufficient interest at Ottawa to enforce their
side of the question they would, to use a
vernacular expression, "get left" on the
contract. They had only four members
at present, although they might have five
in a short time. Were the Territories in
a position to fight all the other parts of
Canada, because fight they must. Would
the Parliament at Ottawa give them full
consideration for the large amount of public lands which had been taken from them
for the general benefit of Canada? The
Parliament at Ottawa would simply give
what they thought proper, and not what
the Territories wanted. More than 30
millions of acres had been taken away
from the Territories for the C.P.R.
Could they put a price on that land? A
great part of that land at present had no
value. If this country developed, — as
it had, slowly it was true, but it had developed, — surely that land would get a
larger value, and the Territories would be
in a better position a few years hence to
make a demand for compensation better
than they were now; and if they did
make a demand now they would get left.
Rather than that he would possess his
soul in patience a few years longer.
Reference had been made to the position
of Manitoba at the time it entered into
confederation. The Territories were not
in the same position as was Manitoba.
Manitoba was not made a province be
cause the people there wanted or liked it.
They were simply made a province because
they were compelled to; it was through
necessity. And when they wanted to
make a change in a few years
they found it would cost them a
rebellion nearly to shake off their contract and make a new one. The Territories were
not forced by force of circumstances. When they went into a province
they would do it with a free will, and with
power to make contracts which would be
binding upon their heirs forever. Considering the lands here would have an
enormous value in a few years, and considering that if they were to put a price
upon those lands now they would be doing a great injustice to the people who are
to come after; when they considered their
position, that they were not able to force
their claims, he thought they should halt
before entering into a binding contract.
The hon. member seemed to think — and
perhaps many people had expressed similar opinions — that as soon as a province
was formed the revenue at once fell in,
be he (Mr. Insinger) did not know
from where. Probably from the sky, or
some other place equally remote. The
estimated revenue for the province of
Manitoba last year was $800,000. The
idea of having a province was to develop.
If they wanted to go into the developing
business they had to get the money, and
the whole thing hinged upon the fact that
when they became a province it would
give them more money. He did not
think that was the fact. If the hon.
member would look up the revenues of
Manitoba he would find that the estimated revenue consisted in the first place of
a
Dominion grant of $50,000. So far as
the Dominion grant was concerned the
Territories were making a claim for some
similar consideration. On that ground,
therefore, the province was in no better
position than the Territories. In the
next place the Manitoba revenue consisted of the magnificent sum of $6,000 local
revenues. These were the the same local
revenues as the Territories could levy
with the exception of a law stamp levy,
which brought in $12,000. The Territories
however, could bring in similar legislation
to provide for the same purposes, but up
to the present they had not thought fit to
do so. The balance of those revenues was
made up of fees which were not of particular benefit to a province. They found
that Manitoba as a province — and the
Territories would be in the same position
— did not increase their revenue by
one single cent on the amount they would
get as a territory. Therefore the province
had no advantage over a territory. The
hon. member for Banff had stated that in
British Columbia they had local taxation,
but they had no municipal taxation ; and
in Manitoba they had municipal taxation
but no provincial taxation. From that he
seemed to infer that they would be the
same as British Columbia. Surely the
hon. member must see that because Manitoba did not raise its money by provincial
taxation, and British Columbia raises its
money by a local taxation, that we could
do without either of them. But if the
Territories, as a province, went in for large
plans surely they must go in for some
taxation. Where was money to come
from? Was it to come from heaven, or
from England, or where, and bring in
capital and they never pay interest on it?
In Manitoba they had a local taxation for
the maintenance and building of their
Court houses, only they did not raise it
for the province, but divided it amongst
the municipalities, but after all it was exactly the same thing as provincial taxation.
It was not necessary for the Territories to go in for being made a province
in order to get what they were seeking;
the same object could be obtained by go
ing in for territorial autonomy, and with
the distinct advantage that the demand
for larger Territorial powers was on the
face of it, not a contract, but only an
arrangement that would hold good for a
few years, or until such time as they
might want something else. Another
great advantage the asking for Territorial
autonomy would have over asking
the erection of a province, was
that they had a great deal more chance of
getting it. The hon. member for Banff
seemed to think that in politics by asking
for a great deal more than you expect
you would get a little. A mistake of
that kind was worse than a mistake. It
was simply prejudicing the whole case.
If they went to Ottawa and showed that
they asked for more than they expected,
that they were asking for what they did
not want; if they went and asked for
things in the lump and did not know that
they had a distinct knowledge of the
items, he thought they ran a great chance
of getting nothing at all. Their principle
should be to go and ask for those things
in detail;— show why they wanted those
things, and prove that they really wanted
them. If they showed that they understood what they wanted, and that they
knew how to handle it, they stood a very
good chance of getting it. He did not
believe in asking for a whole lot of things
in the chance of getting a little. He believed they should follow the lines laid
down in the memorial. In asking for
Territorial autonomy they did not ask for
the power to charter railways. The power of chartering railways was absolutely
useless to them unless they were in a position to go and grant them the credit of
a
country, and that they could not do.
Another power they did not ask for in
the memorial was the administration of
justice in criminal matters. That was a
point upon which a certain amount of
difference of opinion should be allowed.
He was inclined to ask that administration
of justice be given them, but it was found
there were certain very heavy charges
against the administration of justice, and
it would be foolish to take upon their
shoulders such a very large debt unless
there was a very good reason shown in
favor of it. In the memorial they asked
for certain amendments. First they asked that the powers which were given under the
North-West Territories Act, and
which were now subject to any Act of the
Parliament of Canada, should be secured
to the Assembly. That means that
the moment the Assembly had passed a
law in any subject some member of Parliament might turn round and make some
bill in which one clause perhaps affected
the Territories, and therefore put aside
their ordinance. They had been in such
danger several times. For instance there
was the Animals Infections Acts. They
had the same danger when they brought
into that House a bill regarding the inspection of coal mines. When they
brought in a bill respecting irrigation they
did not know whether they had power or
not to deal with the subject. The memorial asked that the powers they had, and
such other powers as they asked for,
should be given to them the same as to
any province in Canada. It was also
asked that the Executive Committee
should be changed for an Executive Council. An Executive Council had all the
political precedents of England and Canada to show it its way. An Executive
Committee never knew what it was at.
The memorial also asked that the Assembly should have powers to incorporate
insurance companies; that the appointments of sheriffs and clerks should be put
in their hands; and they asked for other
powers which would not be of any great
value to them, but it certainly would be
policy to have them. They made a claim
for more funds for the reasons that they
stood greatly in need of more money, and
that the Parliament of Canada was responsible for the due administration of education
in this country; as long as they
were a territory and not a province the
Parliament of Canada was responsible for
the full government of affairs in this country. They had also shown that if they be
allowed to make an analogy of what was
due to them, and what to the province,
they could show a very great claim for a
greater amount of money, but they did
not in the memorial want to base their
claim on that, and they did not want to
put a distinct figure on the subsidy they
might claim for compensation for lands.
He thought there were few occasions when
they, as a House, had to state their position as a House, and when those occasions
did arise it was their duty to give unreservedly expression to their opinions, so
that not only the House but the country
should know exactly where they were.
He did not think it was their duty to
slowly follow public opinion, but to lead
public opinion. The Territories needed
more funds, and they had a right to more
funds. They contributed as much as any
province in Canada, and there was no
reason why other men in Canada should
be given fifty cents back out of every dollar they contributed, while they of the
Territories should be sent back only
ten or fifteen cents of the dollar they contributed. (Applause.)
(Lethbridge) stated that as the hon. gentleman who had just sat down had suggested
there should be an amendment before
the House on the lines the hon. member
for Banff had spoken, he rose to propose
such an amendment, which was seconded
by the hon. member for Banff (Mr. Brett.)
It was in connection with the following
clause of the memorial:— "The Assembly
is of opinion that to remedy this undesirable state of affairs it is not necessary
to
have recourse to the granting of a full
provincial status. They believe that till
the time arrives, which may be at a not
distant day, when the Territories should
be taken into Confederation (as one or
more provinces) the passing of a few
amendments to the North-West Territories Act will allow them, subject to disallowance
of their ordinances, to exclusively make laws in relation to matters already within
their legislative jurisdiction."
Mr. Magrath said that according
to that clause they did not
appear to have fully made up their
minds as to whether that day was at an
early period or not. The next point was
as to whether they felt they "should be
taken into Confederation as one or more
provinces." The amendment he would
move simply meant that they should more
forcibly point out that it was the opinion
of the House that this country should be
taken into Confederation as two provinces
at a very early period, otherwise it did
not disturb the memorial in any matter
whatever. He did not follow the hon.
gentleman from Banff, but he did hear
the levity with which the hon. member
from Yorkton referred to Alberta.
Mr. Insinger: I didn't refer to Alberta with any levity at all.
Mr. Magrath: I certainly accept the
hon. gentleman's view of the matter, but
it appeared to me in his referring to Alberta that he did do so, and that, subsequently,
he made amends by asserting
that Alberta was after all one of the fairest provinces.
Mr. Insinger: I might have referred
to the views expressed by the hon. member for Banff, but there is a difference between
the views expressed by the hon.
member for Banff respecting Alberta, and
Alberta itself.
Mr. Magrath: I am glad to hear the
explanation. I feel the time will come
when we must enter Confederation as a
province.
Mr. Magrath: I say as a province. He
considered the interests in the Territories
were entirely different. In the west
they had to look to the west for their
trade, while in the east the trade was
largely diverted, or largely flowed towards
the east, and in that it appeared to him
there was a wide difference. As to being
created into a full province at the present
time he did not think it was desirable or
necessary. It was an unfortunate thing
in Canada to day, that they were overgoverned. (Hear, hear.) There were
too many institutions in Canada, but he
felt, if they thought their interests were
going to be different in this country, that
they should emphasize their views in re
lation to that so far as the creation of more
than one province was concerned.
Half past five having arrived Mr. Speaker left the chair, leaving the hon. gentleman
in possession of the floor.
The House re-assembled at eight o'clock.
In the greater part of the evening the
chair was occupied by Mr. Deputy Speaker Page, in the absence of the Speaker.
Mr. Magrath, resuming, said the question for consideration was not a question
as to the importance of the memorial at
large; it was merely a question as to the
expression of opinion contained in one
clause of that memorial. He, and those
who held the same views as he did, wished to go further than the memorial.
There was the difference. They all agreed
that the time would come when the Territories would be taken into Confederation
(hear, hear.) They were a unit on that.
(Hear, hear.) But it had occurred to
those who held the same opinions as himself that the memorial did not emphasize
that fact strongly enough. They had
never approached the Federal Government
on matters pertaining to the welfare of
this country that were conceded to them
when asked for. Were they going to wait
until the time had arrived when they
considered the time was ripe for the entering of the Territories into Confederation
before they brought the matter
strongly to the attention of the Federal
Government as they should? He did not
think that was desirable. There had
been a good deal of talk about educating
the country. He thought they had some
education to do in reference to this matter. It was their duty to commence the
education, and commence it on vigorous
lines. He did not for a moment imagine
if they presented the memorial to the
Federal Government that it would be received, and that they would be received
with open arms. He also thought that
they should bring the matter very forcibly
before the Government, not that he
thought they were going to have it granted, but that they might keep pressing it
from time to time. If they were satisfied
that the Federal Government would take
the memorial into consideration and act
upon it then he and his friends would sit
down. But their experience had been
otherwise, and for that reason they had
considered it necessary to draw attention
to that portion in one clause of it. There
was no diversity of opinion as to the main
point in that part of the amendment.
The next point he understood was they
considered that when the time did arrive
for the Territories to be taken into Confederation, that the section of the country
from which he and his friends came should
be set apart as a province. They did not
presume to try to educate the House as to
what should be done with the rest of the
Territories. That remained for the representatives of the people of the balance of
the Territories. He thought he could
state confidently, that when the time had
arrived, the larger portion of Alberta
would be found a unit on that question.
(Hear, hear.) They had to bear in mind
that a portion of Alberta had already discussed this matter. It had not been discussed
in his section. From the discussions that took place there was no question in his
mind that the people of that
section of country had stated positively
and emphatically that they wished to be
set apart as a province. As to the other
sections it was a matter of question. He
believed if Alberta was canvassed to-day
that they would vote against provincial
institutions. (Mr. Haultain: "Hear,
hear.") — because they were frightened, he
thought, largely from the fact that there
was no question but there was too much
government in Canada. (Hear, hear.) It
was hardly possible to walk down any by
alley without meeting someone who was
in the business. So people for that reason, he considered, had just cause to feel
alarmed. But that did not alter the fact
that they were coming to it, that they had
got to come to it, and the question then
would be with the people of Alberta,
whether they wanted one or two provinces. When that time came, he was positive that
90 per cent of the people of Alberta would ask for Alberta being set
apart as one province. (Hear, hear.) It
might be argued that the Territories are
not as large as some of the provinces in
Canada. He was reminded the other day
that what was good for Ontario and elsewhere, it did not necessarily follow it was
good for this country, and he concurred
with that statement, although it did not
possibly suit his views at that time. But
the cases were not parallel. Ontario was
very large, probably much larger in extent than were the Territories, — at least
much longer. But the populated portion
of Ontario was not, nor ever would be, as
large as the portions of the Territories
that were capable of population, and that
would be populated in due time. There
were good reasons that could be advanced
on the part of the people of Alberta which
it might not be desirable to advance, as
he might be accused of being narrow in
his views, but they all looked after their
own interests first, and although he belonged to Alberta he was a Canadian, and
if he thought the portion of the country
to which he belonged, by having provincial rights of its own would be of, advantage
not only to itself but to Canada, he
thought no one should blame him for having that wish. (Hear, hear.) The hon.
member from Banff had made quite a
lengthy speech in which he brought down
some figures. He (Mr. Magrath) did not
say he endorsed the ideas the hon. member advanced. He had no doubt the figures were
correct, but the hon. member
for Yorkton, in referring to them, stated
the figures were not fact, but he did not
try to dispute them, and he did not add
that figures don't lie. He (Mr. Magrath)
did not think the criticism of the hon.
member for Yorkton had the force he
would like the House to believe. There
were other matters referred to by the
hon. members which he (Mr. Magrath)
need not reply to because he was good
enough to withdraw—
Mr. Insinger: I beg your pardon;
I didn't withdraw a single statement I
made.
Mr. Magrath: I certainly understood
you to withdraw—
Mr. Magrath: I accept the hon. gentleman's correction.
Mr. Insinger: I accept the hon. gentleman's apology.
Mr. Magrath: I have a distinct recollection that the hon. gentleman referred
to several matters in Alberta deduced
from figures the hon. member for Banff
adduced. The deductions he drew were
that the tippling proclivities of the people
of Alberta were noted, and he made other
statements in reference to the Albertan's
ability for consuming liquor. (Laughter.)
As a representative from Alberta, of
course I don't like that. (Hear, hear)
I presume there are other representatives
from Alberta who are going to speak tonight, who are more capable of looking
after Albertan interest than I am, and I
leave it to them to either endure, if they
see fit, the expressions that the hon.
gentleman chose to make in reference to
that matter, or refute them if they think
it desirable. I therefore beg to move,
seconded by the hon. member for Banff,
"That the report be referred back to the
select committee with instructions to
strike out the first clause of the section
referred to, and insert in lieu thereof
the following: The Assembly is of the
opinion that until the Territories are admitted into Confederation as two or more
provinces which they consider is necessary
at an early date for the compact government on local lines of such a vast country,
that the passage of a few amendments at
the first session of the Parliament of Canada to the North-West Territories Act
will allow them, subject to disallowance
of their ordinances, to exclusively make
laws in relation to matters already within
their legislative jurisdiction." (Applause.)
(Medicine Hat) said he was in the embarassing position of agreeing in part with
promoters of the memorial and in part
with the framers of the amendment. He
agreed with the first part of the question
as to whether the time had arrived that
steps should be taken towards admitting
the Territories into the Confederation as
a province. The framers of the memorial
as interpreted by the hon. member from
Yorkton seemed to infer that the time
had not yet arrived. The position they
took was that they would leave matters
as they are,—in the same indefinite manner as now exists. It was there that he
differed from them. He considered the
time had arrived that at least steps
should be taken to frame events which
would speedily allow the Territories to be
taken into Confederation as a province.
The hon. member from Yorkton, in giving his reasons why he considered it premature
that such a step should be taken
gave as one, that even with an increased
subsidy the difference between the amount
of money coming to them as a province
and now, would not be sufficient to more
than bear the expenses of the Territories,
and that it would be absolutely necessary
to carry on the government,—that was on
the lines that a province should be carried
on to develop the resources of the country,—that means would be taken to borrow money.
Mr. Insinger considered it would be premature to do so. The
point then to be considered was, if, with
a population of 112,000 in the Territories,
that was not sufficient, when would they
arrive at that point? If with a membership in the Dominion Parliament of four
members they were not sufficient, how
many should they have before they would
be in a position to compel the Dominion
Government to grant the Territories terms
as favorable as they could desire? It was
constantly brought forward that admission
into Confederation as a province would
necessitate the borrowing of money. He
believed it would, but he did not consider
it so much of a bugbear as it was popularly supposed to be. They were in the
position of a business house, or a farmer,
who by cultivating part of his farm was
able to pay expenses. He had natural
resources in a large area, but he did not
attempt to cultivate simply because he
had not the means to do so. Was it better
for him to continue indefinitely only paying expenses, or to borrow money, develop
his farm and make it a dividend paying concern? That was the position they
were in regarding the Territories. Whether would it be better for them to go on
for an indefinite period simply paying expenses, allowing their natural resources
to remain dormant, or whether it would
be better to borrow money and develop
the resources? The hon. member from
Yorkton, in speaking of British Columbia
and Manitoba, as the different systems of
carrying on municipal or provincial government, showed it was absolutely necessary
that some taxes had to be levied in
British Columbia, but he said the taxes
were levied by a provincial tax. That
was correct. But that tax in rural districts, other than municipalities, this year
was only 10 mills on the dollar. There
was a poll tax of $3 per head for all who
were not otherwise assessed. As he said,
the tax was only 10 mills on the dollar,
but they should bear in mind the provincial government paid all the expenses of
the scholl system,—that it included what
in the Territories was their school tax,he asked did they consider that a very
high tax? How many school districts
were there in the Territories whose assessment was lower than 10 mills on the dollar?
So that to-day they were assessing
themselves nearly as high as British Columbia assessed itself. British Columbia
had developed from a population of
20,000 to a population of 80,000 during
the last 15 years. British Columbia came
into confederation as a crown colony. But
supposing B.C. had been an undeveloped
portion of the North-West Territories,
and instead of going into confederation as
a province had simply been formed into a
local government on the lines of the
North-West Territories, what would have
been her position to-day? The amount
of money she would have had to expend
would only have been sufficient to pay
expenses, consequently they would have
had no money to make their roads and to
make the necessary improvements that
had produced that increase. British
Columbia not being an agricultural country, it might be said the N.W.T had
increased in the same ratio, but with this
difference,—the Territories had an asset
that could be realized, upon agricultural
lands ; British Columbia had none. So if
British Columbia had been in the position
of a Territoryshe would have been to-day
with very few more in population than
she was then. It was only by borrowing
money she was able to develop her natural
resources that made it possible for a
population of 8,000 or 9,000 to exist at
Cariboo, 300 miles from the railroad, and
made it possible for millions of money to
be invested there. It was not a danger
to have the power vested in a provincial
government to borrow money; it was only
by that means that it was possible to develop the uatural resources of the country.
He hoped he hd made himself clear on
that point. The first part of the question
was that he was distinctly in favor in the
near future of the best efforts being made
to admit the Territories into confederation
as a province.
Mr. Fearon: That was where he agreed
with the framers of the memorial, and
where he differed with them in not going
far enough. Where he differed from the
framers of the amendments was where they
laid down that the Territories should be
admitted as two or more provinces. If
they entered as two provinces they would
enter as three. Was it desirable that the
Territories should be divided into three
provinces? He thought not. That would
be a state of affairs only parallel to the
Maritime provinces to-day, where there
was a movement to consolidate the three
provinces into one. The hon. member
from Banff spoke of the amount of money
paid into the local revenue fund from
Alberta. The amounts were small and
unimportant for the very reason that
they might from year to year alter the
amount of money obtained from licenses,
registration of companies; and other
sources of revenue were such that at any
time the case might be reversed. There
was no argument advanced why Alberta
should be separated from the Territories
and formed into a province that could not
be advanced in favor of any other part of
the Territories. In fact it was disintegration, a principle opposed to the spirit
of
the age. He was opposed to any division
of the Territories. There were many
arguments why they should remain united.
First, that as a whole they certainly would
be of more importance than they would be
divided. The hon. member for Lethbridge
(Mr. Magrath) thought the Territories
would be too large, and as evidence advanced that the territories to the south
had recognized the principle and divided
as small as possible. It would be found,
however, that the territories, which are
now States, like Dakota, Texas and others
were as large or larger than the NorthWest Territories. It had not been shown
that there had ever been any difficulty
about the machinery of the Territories.
If it was possible for the Executive Committee in a sparsely populated country,
now to manage the machinery of Government in the North-West Territories under
present conditions he did not see how but
a provincial cabinet ought to be able to do
it with increased facilities. He would
have preferred seeing an amendment
brought in which would more clearly have
answered his position, but as it remained
at present between voting for the memorial as it stood, which left it in doubt, and
the amendment proposed, which distinctly
stated that two or more provinces should
be formed, he must vote against the
amendment and in favor of the memorial.
(Hear, hear.)
The debate will be continued in next
issue.
5THE LEADER, THURSDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 19, 1896.
SECESSION
Shall the Territories Be
Divided?
Mr. Haultain Emphatically Says,
No! and Gives Good Reasons
for His Answer — The Secessionists Admit Their Defeat,
and Shirk a Vote.
In the "Memorial" debate in the Assembly, Messrs Brett and Insinger spoke in
the afternoon. At half-past five Mr.
Magrath had the floor. He continued
speaking half an hour after recess, and
was followed by Mr. Fearon, whose
speech was printed last week. It was
about nine o'clock when the leader of the
House rose to combat the plea of the
secessionists.
said that after the debate which took
place in the afternoon he ha not thought
of taking up any of the time of the House,
but it had taken a peculiar turn by reason of the amendment which had been
put in, — a turn which had a particular
personal application to several members of
the House on account of their coming
from Alberta, and considering the importance of the question at issue. He would
refer to the amendment first and then
proceed to make a few remarks with regard
to the general line of debate which had
been taken. The amendment was to the
effect that the Assembly was of the opinion that until the Territories were admit
ed into confederation as two or more
provinces, which they considered was
necessary at an early date for the compact
government on local lines of such a vast
country, that the passage of a few amendments at the first session of the Parliament
of CAnada to the N.W.T. Act would
allow them, subject to disallowance of
their ordinances to exclusively make laws
in relation to matters already within their
legislative jurisdiction. The amendment
involved two questions. IN the first place
was the statement that the Territories should
be divided into two provinces at an early
date not particularly certain, — almost as
vague as the words of the memorial; and
in the second place that until that event
became a fact, — until the Territories were
divided into two provinces, they should
practically remain as they were. He did
not know whether the hon. gentleman
who had framed the amendment had altogether followed out exactly what he
meant. The memorial asked that they
should remain as they were with regard
to their legislative jurisdiction, but that
they should have that jurisdiction considerably extended in many important matters.
So that the amendment, in its prophetic allusion, was progress so far as
the practical question with which the
House was concerned; but in the other
part the amendment was a stand still, if
not retrograde, and for that reason he
would have to oppose the amendment.
They had a large number of powers
which at present were not complete, and
in which, so far as those powers were concerned, and so far as other things which
at present generally came with their
legislative jurisdiction, they must look
for an immediate extension, — not for a
remote extension at the time when a province or provinces may be established.
The memorial was the practical suggestion
of a practical body with regard to the
actual present needs of the Territories.
The amendment said they wanted a certain number of provinces at an indefinite
period, and then proceeds to state they
really did not want anything more in the
way of extension to their legislative jurisdiction, but were perfectly satisfied to
remain as they were in that respect, except
that present jurisdiction should be rounded out as far as it stands at present and
be made complete. To his mind the
amendment nullified one fo the most important parts of the memorial, — that part
which asked for the extension of their
legislation jurisdiction, and for that reason could not commend itself to the House.
No matter what the hon. member, the
mover of the amendment, might believe
with regard to what number of provinces
they should have at a future day; no matter what any hon. member might believe
to be the proper way of stating their
position with regard to the legislative rights
and financial claims, he could not accept
the position of the amendment which said
they did not want anything more than
they had now. The amendment was not
practical, it did not settle anything, but
it left everything for the considereation of
the future. The whole subject connected
with the memorial had been very sufficiently and very fully discussed during
the afternoon — so far as the speech of
the hon. gentleman from Yorkton was
concerned, more fully and more ably discussed than any question he ever heard
debated in that House. Therefore he
(Mr. Haultain) would not attempt to take
up the time of the House in dealing with
the details of the memorial, or in dealing
with their financial position. Those were
fully set out in the memorial, and with
which they all pretty well agreed. The
question so far as the amendment was
concerned, so far as any differenece of
opinion with the memorial was concerned,
was a question of what should their institutions be? He went further and said it
was a question of what should their institutions be now? not what they should be
at some future date. That involved the
questin of whether they should have a
single province, or whether they should
debate the system proposed in the memorial of a gradual development of the present
Territorial system until they arrived
at such a point that they would be albe to
slide into confederation almost without
knowing it. That question had been complicated by the amendment which meant
that Alberta should be established into a
province itself. As a member representing an Albertan constituency, he must
take exception to the position assumed by
the hon. member for Banff in undertaking
to represent the views of Alberta. He
(Mr. Haultain) denied any right on the
part of the hon. gentleman to attempt to
represent what the opinions of the pepole
of Alberta were except so far as those
people were confined to the limits of his
own electoral district. He might tell
him, and other hon. gentlemen from Alberta, that he did not believe Alberta
wished to be made a province. He did
not believe there had been a proper statement of the feeling of Alberta to-day. He
agreed with what the hon. gentleman from
Lethbridge (Mr. Magrath) said, that if a
poll were taken to-day in Alberta on the
question of whether Alberta should be set
aside as a province there would be a very
large majority against it in spite of the
efforts of the Alberta autonomy movement
in Calgary. That movement originated
in the town of Calgary in one sense. It
was a very praiseworthy movement in so
far as it called attention to certain important public matters and gave opportunity
to consider the larger question of the form
of government in the Territories. But
on the other side, if he might judge from
the propaganda of the movement in the
shape of pamphlets, and from the speeches
he had heard from prominent advocates
of the movement, after all the movement
was largely a very local one. They appealed largely to the desparate condition
into which certain portions of Alberta had
unfortunately fallen. He heard of large
and visionary schemes on provincial lines
by which millions of dolars were going to
be raised in the money markets of the
world, by which large public works were
going to be undertaken, and in fact, under
the expenditure of which sums everyone
was going to get work to be rich; to say
nothing of the incidental fact that Calgary was going to be established as the
capital of the future province, that public
buildings were going to be built there; that
the Assembly, or something like the present one, or better, was going to be established
there; that there would be a completely planned civil service, and that Calgary should
blossom out from its present
condition into a full blown capital. That
was the most practical argument he heard,
but it was not a practical argument that
appealed to him, or that should appeal to
the members of the House, or to the
people of Alberta when asked to take
such an important step as to separate
from the Territories. As a member from
Alberta he was not prepared to advocaate
any scheme which meant the division of
Alberta from the rest of the Territories
and making it into a province. Considering the practical interests of the country,
considering the practical work they had
to do, he did not feel disposed to be asked to express an opinion upon the subject.
The gentlemen who had advocated Alberta
autonomy that day in the House did not
go any nearer than saying it was something to be hoped for in the near future,
whatever that might be. Why, therefore,
should the House be asked to spoil a
memorial which dealt with their present
needs; which dealt with their undoubted
rights and the righteous demands they
wished to make with regard to their
immediate surroundings and their everyday institutions? Why should he be called upon
to express an opinion with regard
to something which was simply anticipatory of a movment which might take place
at some future date, as the hon. gentleman put it in his amendment. The hon.
gentleman from Banff referred to the
present connection of Alberta as a partnership in a firm, and said that member
of the firm wished to withdraw. He (Mr.
Haultain) did not know exactly what the
hon. member meant when he spoke of a
partnership existing between what was
one single united country, and he believed it would remain so. The diversity of
interests which existed between various
parts of the Territories had been spoken
of as giving a good and strong ground for
dividing the Territories up. What sort
of a province did the hon. gentleman wish
it to be? Did they want to have one
sheep farm, or one wheat field, or one
sort of a field devoted to some other sort
of industry which their own insignificance
would allow them to describe? If they
wished to have a good strong province,
strong in its own resources, they should
have a diversity of resources (hear, hear.)
Much better than having a comparatively
small amount of land devoted to one or
two interests would it be if they could
have a very large area such as the organized Territories were to-day with their
diversity of interests, but not conflict of
interests. They should look forward to
having a very much stronger and better
province than there would be if they ha
to be divided up. Was there as much
diversity of interest or conflict of interest,
if they liked to use the expression, between
the most remote portions of the Territoreis
as there was between any sections of the
older provinces? There was no conflict.
He did not think any member of the
House could state that at any time in the
history of the House there was any conflict of interest between those portions of
the Territories known as Alberta, Assiniboia and Saskatchewan. He believed
there was a Saskatchewan question at one
time, but that lost a large amount of its
significance in the comprehesive term
"in other respects," so he was
safe in saying there was no conflict of interest, at least very apparent. Hon.
gentlemen who had argued with regard to
the establishment of a small and weak
province such as ALberta would be, look
at the analogous case of Manitoba, Bri
tish Columbia and other provinces. In
the first place they were not analogous.
Manitoba was not taken into confederation under the same circumstances as the
Territories would be taken into confederation. Manitoba was taken in as a
political necessity. In one sense they
hoped the Territories to be taken in as a
political necessity, but not in the same
sense. In talking of two sides to a bargain, British Columbia when taken into
confederation had a distinct say as to the
terms upon which they would enter. On
the other hand when they of the Territories were talking about two sides to a
bargain, their position now and for a long
time to come would be that, although
they were in one sense one of the contracting parties, in reality the other contracting
party had all the say, because it
had all the power; so that the analogy
between the terms of entrance into confederation either between British Columbia or
Manitoba did not hold good. The
hon. gentleman had referred to direct taxation. If they did not have direct taxation
they certainly could not have enough
money for carrying on their business.
They either had to have direct taxation
or they mjust hae a municipal form of
government under which people would
levy the burdens upon themselves, if they
would be a successful province. It was
very easy to take, as the hon. gentleman
from Banff did, a sheet of paper and with
a few figures make a fortune out of them.
The figures did not lie, but the average
man who relied on the figures was very
apt to find he was very much mistaken.
The figures did not lie, but all the practical questions involved in those figures
had to be taken into consideration. Upon
the credit of what, would any large sums
of money be raised in the proposed
province of Alberta? Not upon
lands, because there were not going to be
any lands; not upon minerals, because
the mineral went with the lands and
were already taken up by Federal
authorities; so that when the hon. gentlemen
indulged in fanciful figures in regard to
large loans of money they should take one
step further and explain exactly how they
expected to raise those large sums of
money. He did not think practical men
living in Alberta had had any large opportunity of seeing that capital was particularly
anxious to flow into the Territories.
When hon. gentlemen talked about borrowing large sums of money they were
simply begging the question and ignoring
the practical side which precluded the
possibility of any such loads being raised
for a very long time to come. The hon.
gentleman's argument with regard to the
compactness of the province or provinces,
and with regard to the desirability of
having comparatively small areas formed
into provinces, might e considered. The
reference to the policy of the United
States with regard to their Territories,
was not a reference which should have
great weight in that House. So far as
they knew anything about American in
situations, he (Mr. Haultain) thought that
was not exactly the part of the world to
which they were going to look for precedents. If the States like to cut up their
country into comparatively small territories, presumably they did so for some
reason, but not, he thought, for the reason advanced by the hon. member for
Lethbridge. At what points were they
going to draw an arbitrary line and say
"at this point facility for governing this
country ceases?" There were no great
natural obstacles to communication in
this country. They could communicate
with the most remote parts in a rapid
manner either by railroad or telegraph, so
at what points would they draw that imaginary line? for after all it was a geographical
line drawn arbitrarily without any
reference to any known number at all, and
no position involving such a division
could commend itself to that House as
being based upon any sound principle, or
even on good common sense. The argument with regard to those narrow limits,
and the special rights which exist within
those norrow limits, seemed to be a decidedly provincial argument. He used the
expression advisedly. He was not opposed to the formation of a province, but he
hoped hon. gentlemen who went in for
the formation of a province would not
take the other meaning of the term and
indulge in arguments which could only be
called both narrow and provincial. If
they were going to confine themselves at
once to the particular rights or particular
claims of smaller portions of this country
they might take the position proposed by
the hon. members from Banff and Lethbridge, and cut the whole country into
small plots so that every man might be a
province unto himself with three acres
and a cow. But it seemed to him they
should take the larger point of view, and
not be bound by the narrow selfish interests and claims, so-called, of any particular
portions of the Territories. The hon.
member from Lethbridge referred repeatedly to the fact that they were over-governed.
He (Mr. Haultain) believed the
hon. gentleman was perfectly right.
(Laughter.) They had heard about the
movement going on now in the maritime
provinces. He had not heard that it had
taken any very definite shape, but he believed there was a feeling in the maritime
provinces at least that they were over- governed; that having three small provincial
governments instead of one strong
government weakened their influence.
But the hon. member from Lethbridge,
when telling them about that state of being over-governed in the Dominion, proceeded,
not in the most logical way, to
recommend that they should follow the
analogy of other parts of the Dominion
by cutting up these Territories necessarily
into a large number of small areas for the
purposes of government. It would simply
mean duplication, or triplication, or some
other quantity of governments, or legislatures, of institutions of all sorts. In fact
all of the larger institutions of the machine
would simply be increased just so many
times as the number of provinces it was
decided there should be, without, so far
as had been shown, any benefit being derived from it. For that reason, then, why
should they have two or more small provinces when one good strong province
would do for all the Territories when the
time for a province had come? He believed they should have one province, but
that they need not have it yet. He believed they should go on, as they had
been going on, with the gradual development of their present institutions, here
and there gaining a little more power,
here and their extending their jurisdiction, here and there getting more money.
There were the practical questions for
consideration, and that very discussion
showed that they were not prepared to
make any definite claim with regard to
provincial questions. The very fact that
there were three sets of opinions expressed in the House showed they were not
prepared to discuss the provincial question with a view to its immediate institution.
They had very difficult questions
to be settled when formed into a province,
questions with regard to their lands and
many other matters. The hon. gentleman from Banff, the other day, in addressing the
House referred to the undignified
position the Territories occupied through
the annual pilgrimages which had to be
made to Ottawa to ask for more money.
If such an attitude was an undignified
attitude for them in their present undeveloped position, what word should he
use to describe a similar proceeding on
the part of the representatives of a full
blown province, because that was what
the hon. gentleman admitted must be
done? If they were going to have a province established at once they were not
going to get what they thought they
ought to get, and they would be obliged
to do exactly what Manitoba had been
obliged to do, and would be obliged to
do, — to make those annual pilgrimages,
only it would be very much more undignified to go down to Ottawa on behalf of
the province and make those annual
claims than it was merely for a member
of that House, who happened to be a
member of the Executive Committee, to
go down to Ottawa from year to year,
simply to say, "we have no agreement
with you, we do not want to ake any
agreement with you, but we want to get
better terms, and we consider we are entitled to better terms?" So far as the
argument of the annual pilgrimages was
concerned the hon. gentleman had better
not have made reference to it. The Territories had gradually demanded and had
gradually taken quietly, it was true, but
not the less effectually, larger powers into
their own hands. They had developed
the Executive Committee, an institution
which was their own creation, and had
practically put into the hands of men responsible to the House almost all the
administrative business of the Territories.
They had been going on gradually until
they had at least arrived to-day very nearly the position of a province so far as
administrative business was concerned.
The memorial stated very clearly the
difference between their present position
and that of a province. It went on to say
they wanted further powers with the one
exception that they did not want to be al
lowed to assume a debt which might complicate the provincial question later on,
and they did not want to be admitted into
confederation simply becausse they did
not feel prepared to discuss the terms of
being admitted into confederation. The
memorial enabled them to go on gradually
developing their institutions, bradually
practising self government until they had
arrived at the time when they were fully
enabled to negotiate with the stronger
body at Ottawa in regard to the important
questions he had mentioned. He did not
think he need wast time in arguing upon
the House that they were not ready to go
into negotiations. There were questions
which demanded a large amount of negotiation and which unfortunately were settled
not so much on principles of right
and justice, but more with respect to the
amount of political pressure which could
be brought to bear upon the Ottawa
authorities. He defied any hon. member
to say they were prepared by virtue of
their representations at Ottawa, or by
virtue of the strength of the Territories in
population, or in any other respect, to go
to Ottawa and negotiate with the authorities there for entrance into confederation.
What they wanted was autonomy. Autonomy meant power to govern themselves. Their jurisdiction
was subject to
continual incursions of Federal legislation.
They made a useful law, and sometimes
an Act was passed at Ottawa which rendered useless their own legislation. They
wanted to be put in the position of a province of passing laws coming within their
own jurisdictions, but wished to defer the
settlement of the very difficult and complicated question as to the terms upon
which they should enter into confederation. To go further than that, they
were met with this fact staring them in
the face, that they were not agreed upon
what they wanted to be in the future.
Some wanted one province, some wanted
two provinces, and possibly before they
had gone much further they might find a
claim for a province somewhere on the
banks of the Saskatchewan. In view of
the fact that the most ardent advocate
of provincial autonomy was not prepared
to show what he really wished to do, why
should they complicate the consideration of
practical questions which concerned their
everyday needs, which come up every
day, and concerned them to-day, and would
continually, until that province or those
provinces had been established, — why
should they complicate their position in
the discussion of something upon which
there were so many differences of opinion, and in the discussion of a question
which could not be practially settle that
night? They might as well drop that
subject and get down to business. Their
business was, What did they want for
the present time, both with regard to
their constitution and with regard to
their finances, not what they wanted for
the future with regard to their constitution, and upon which they were not
agreed. Let the reference in the memorial as to what they wanted be as explicit
and as implicit as possible, but let them
be unanimous as to what they want just
now. The hon. gentleman from Lethbridge said in his amendment that they
should stand still until the change was
made.
Mr. Magrath: I beg the hon. gentleman's pardon, I say nothing of the kind.
Mr. Haultain (reading the amendment): Waht I say is, the amendment
as it reads is subject to only one construction, and that is that it proposes that
we
should stand still until two or more provinces are established. Of course, continued
Mr. Haultain, if the hon. gentleman
did not intend that, he (Mr. Haultain) was
very glad, but that was the only meaning
he could give the amendment if it meant
anything at all. If it meant something
else—
Mr. Haultain proceeded that if the
amendment did not mean that, he did
not see what it did mean. He thought if
they could be unanimous upon what they
wanted, and upon what they ahd a right
to have, they could agree to disagree with
regard to what their future was going to
be. Their present position demanded a
remedy at once. The memorial set that
out much more eloquently than anything
he could say. Therefore let them set
aside the larger question which was for
the future, and turn their attention to
the practical needs of the present moment.
He thought he need not address an argument to the Houe to be unanimous. If
they were not unanimous they need not
hope for anything from Ottawa. If the
hon. member for Banff between now and
next session advocated the Alberta autonomy movement he would at least do a
great deal of good in calling attention to
the system under which the Territories
were not working. It might be a very
good educative movement, and he (Mr.
Haultain) certainly would not object to it,
but if dreams were to be dreamed, and if
visions were to be seen, they had better
be dreamed and better be seen outside of
that House, which after all had only to
do with practical work. If however they
were going to consider the larger subject
it should be a little larger that the comparatively small area of Alberta and Saskatchewan
for after all those names
were only applied for post office purposes.
Their consideration of their needs on that
question should be just as broad as the
whole of the Territories. And if they
were gong to dream a dream, the dream
he would like to dream would be the
dream of one large province with all its
varied resources; a dream of one large
province with a united population, and
not a divided population; and if that
dream could come true he believed it
would be a much better dream, and a
much more desirable dream than the
dream which was dreamed by the hon.
member for Banff. A dream of one large
province holding its own in confederation,
the most powerful province in confederation, would be a much more desirable
thing to think about, and to speculate
about, than a number of small areas confined in their own powers and in their influence.
The dream he would like to
dream would be the dream of the largest
province and the most powerful province
in the greatest and most glorious country
attached to the mightiest empire the world
has ever seen. (Applause.)
(Battleford) said the committee in considering the report as contained in the
memorial, had decided that there were
three possible propositions to bring up in
the matter. One was the consideration
of bringing the whole of the Territories
into one province; or two or more
provinces, and the third was the consideration of an enlargement of their powers as
they were at present. In regard to the
idea of asking for provincial rights the
committee were not in a position very
well to understand what was meant by
the expression "provincial autonomy,"
as it had been used by some members of
the House. The committee endeavored
to find out their views, but were unable
to find any union amongst them as to what
they really wanted. Some did not want
a province at all, they had no idea of
provincial rights; some would be willing
to take a province provided they took in
half of Assiniboia and half of Saskatchewan, and made them a province; others
would be willing to go int as a province
provided Athabasca was taken in. But
the committee could not come to any conclusion as to whether those hon. members
were able to agree as to what they meant
by provincial autonomy. Under the circumstances the committee agreed that the
best thing they could do would be to embody their ideas which would be makeing
a step forward in the position in which
they now were. Regarding the powers
which it would be for their advantage to
have. Powers they did not wish to have
they had not embodied in the report.
He would refer especially to the point of
borrowing money and the administration
of criminal jurisdiction. As far as the
arguments of the hon. member for Banff
were concerned he did not think they
moved in the right direction to convince
that they had necessity to consider the
question of asking for full provincial
rights yet. That must come some day
they were all agreed. The amendment
proposed did not find fault with any of
the propositions embodied in the memorial, it was not finding fault with any of
the powers asked for, it was simply
brought up on a few words contained in
one of the clauses, which was brought in
in parenthesis, the printing of which
would indicate that it was simply a reference to a condition which they would
be in at some future date, when they
would be in a position to ask for provincial powers for one, two, or more provinces.
The fact of those words being in
did not bind that it should be one province, or two, or any number at all. In
the N.W.T. they had been for some time
gradually moving towards increased powers. The powers that had been granted
to them had been exercised with judgment
and with good results. The argument had
been brought forward that they should
ask for a great deal more than they expected. He took issue with that. If
they put forward claims on just principles
and gave good sound reasons in support
of them, they would be more likely to get
what they wanted than if they asked for
something which they could not justify.
It had been said they had made progress
slowly. He admitted they had not got
the powers they asked for immediately,
but they had had a change of administration at Ottawa, whether
Conservative or Liberal, there was always
a thing hanging over those Governments,
and that was shortness of money, and
they would doubtless find that it did not
matter what administration it was, they
would always be inclined to keep as much
of the money in their own hands as possible. That was to say, they would not
be willing to give the Territories any more
money than they were entitled to, and it
was necessary for them all the more decidedly to show what they actually required
and they were not asking more than
they could make use of. As to the development of the coal fields in Alberta, that
would be very largely dependent upon the
population of the Territories. It was all
very well to say they could get a large
market in the south, but there was be
tween them and the south a wall of
tariffs, and there was every prospect that
that wall would be built higher every
day, so that it would be a handicap upon
the Alberta coal fields as regards markets.
It would be better for Alberta to aid in
getting the population into the Territories
which would give a market for the minerals of Alberta and which would result in
getting the population into Alberta, and
that again result in consuming the productions of the Territories. As regards
the borrowing of money on public credit,
he might say that in order to do that, they
must have good security. He could not
see where the money was to come from, if
they had a province such as Alberta, except from direct taxation, and direct taxation
was always a cry which tended to
keep population from going into the country. The freer they could make a country as
far as direct taxation was concerned, the more likely they would be to get
population. The hon. member for Banff
instanced a cry that came from Saskatchewan for provincial autonomy. He (Mr.
Clinkskill) did not know that the hon.
member was referring to anything except
that once upon a time a very slight wail
was heard to come from that vast territory, but it was of such a very weak nature
that it never reached very far, and
they had heard nothing of it since that
one time it was given expression to. He
could not talk for the people of Saskatchewan in the same way the hon. member
talked for the people of Alberta, but he
did know that he was in favor of one province and not of two, and he was in favor
of a gradual development of the powers
they had until the arrival of the time
when the step into a province would be a
very short step to take. He could not
follow the hon. gentleman's figures. He
showed that 78 per cent of the revenue
was got from Alberta and 30 per cent. was
spent on schools. He (Mr. Clinkskill)
was very sorry to hear the hon. member
from Yorkton accused of levity in speaking of that matter. The charge of levity
should have been raised against the hon.
member for Banff for raising the argument that the country used so much on
the one hand, and on the other hand spent
so little in a proper direction. Certainly
he (Mr. Clinkskill) did not think that
was an argument in favor of a people
being allowed full provincial powers.
He was sorry the hon. member for Banff
had not by this time come to reason, and
was not assisting them in that progress
which was desirable. At one time the
hon. gentleman's career in that House was
directly opposed to the progress of the
House, and the move he was making now
was nothing different from the stand he
took at that time. The development that
had taken place in their powers in the
Territories, they had not to thank they
the hon. member for Banff for. In conclusion he (Mr. Clinkskill) said he was in
favor of all the claims laid down in the
memorial. He would like to have
those granted, and he would like
to say that if they be not granted, or were not granted at an
early day, he would be in favor of one province but not of two provinces. (Hear,
hear).
was allowed to speak. He said it would
occur from the remarks just made
by the hon. gentleman from Battleford
that it was heresy, or taknig a stand
against everything that was good and
right in the direction of the progress of
this country, to bring up a question that
he (Mr. Brett) thought was an important
one. However, the point of view raised
by the amendment was not one that was
not without suggestion. If hon. gentlemen would read the paragraph in the
memorial upon which the amendment was
based, they would see there was practical
invitation to the House to discuss one or
more vital questions. There was an invitation there to discuss distinctly they
principle involved in the amendment. It
distinctly stated "one or more." If there
happened to be a number of gentlemen in
the House who conscientiously believed
that when the time does come for the
division of the Territories, and that it
should not be a question of, one but of
two, it was a proper thing and a proper
time to discuss that in the frankest and
fullest manner. That was the reason the
amendment had been presented. So far
as being unanimous, he dared say the
House could be made perfectly unanimous.
He did not think there was a dissenting
voice in the House with reference to the
memorial generally speaking, but there
was a difference of opinion with reference
to whether there should be one or two
provinces. The hon. member for Macleod
Mr. Haultain) wished the House to understand that if the amendment was
accepted it would practically nullify the
whole of the memorial. If the amendment did that then most undoubtedly the
clause as it appeared in the memorial
nullified the balance of it. The amendment anticipated going on for some time
at least on the lines indicated by the
memorial, only that it asked that amendments be passed at next session of Parliament
at Ottawa. So that the amendment
aimed at really being immediately progressive in that direction while the memorial
did not. It had been asked, on what
credit would the province of Alberta borrow money? He answered, on precisely
the same kind of credit as Manitoba
borrowed money. Manitoba had no lands
to pledge any more than they had; she
pledged the credit of the province in its
future on the public buildings already
existing and hereafter to be built, and
Alberta could take the same basis of
credit, only with this difference, that Alberta would have a very much larger
country, if the extent of country was to
be taken into consideration.
in speaking to the amendment, said he
did at one time suggest to the hon. member for Banff that the amendment would
better have come up as an amendment to
the memorial as a whole. If it was not
opposed to the memorial, then the hon.
member must take the horn of the alternative and profess that it did not mean
anything at all. The amendment should
have been brought in either as an amendment to the whole memorial, or as a separate
resolution.
(Red Deer) said he thought the member
of the House had no differences of opinion as to the memorial, and as to the difference
between the memorial and the
amendment, for his part he would be
in favor of the memorial as it stood.
(Edmonton) said he had received a good
deal of information from listening to the
debate. While he was very sorry to find
out that Alberta had been charged with
being so — intemperate, he might say [?]
(laughter) he had often heard it said
that the people in the N.W.T., and especially in Alberta, were cheerful drinkers,
yet he did not know they could be
charged with so much in that line. But
with regard to educational matters he
thought they were up with the times, that
they kept pace with the other parts of the
Territories, and he was sorry to hear the
insulting remarks of the hon. member
for Yorkton respecting that matter.
Mr. Insinger: I simply tied to explain
away certain things which the hon. member for Banff had said; but the charge me
with having insulted Alberta because I
tried to explain away certain insulting
references by the hon. member for Banff
is wrong. I accepted the actual statement of the hon. member for Banff, and
any reflections upon that statement should
not be made towards me, but to the hon.
member who made the statement.
Mr. McCaulay: I will then charge
the hon. member with repeating waht the
hon. member for Banff did say. (Roars of
laughter.) While I accpet that with a
good grace and think any hon. member
in this House should accept any statement
there is one thing: when it comes down
to charging Alberta with committing
three-quarters of the crime committed in
the Territories, I draw the line there
(Hear, hear.) Continuing Mr. McCaulay
said that while there was very little difference, as far as he could see, in the amendment
and the memorial, he thought that
they all agreed that the time had now
arrived for provincial autonomy. What
then should they quarrel of differ over [?]
section where it said "one, two or more?"
When the time came it would be time
enough to decide whether it should be "one
or two or more." Therefore he could not
agree with the amendment. He would
rather see one good province than two
poor ones. He had made up his mind to
support the memorial as it stood (Applause.)
(Prince Albert) said that after the
expression made use of by the hon. member for Macleod that he expected to hear
an expression from the borders of Saskatchewan as to provincial rights, he might
said that they hards nothing of provincial
rights from there. There had been, some
time ago, a wail from there, as the hon.
member for Battleford had said, but it
was buried in the back woods. He
thought they were going on satisfactorily
in the Territories and that the memorial
was in the right direction. It had taken
the Territories 20 years to reach the present stage and he thought it would, at
the present rate of progress, be 20 years
more before they were ready for provincial autonomy.
Mr. Magrath: For fear of losing the
little support I had in connection with
this amendment, I will, with the permission of the House, withdraw it.
Leave was given, and the amendment
was withdrawn.
The House then went into committee
of the whole at 10:45. Progress was
immediately reported. The memorial
passed a second and third time, was [[?]
curred in, and a resolution adopted to the
effect that His Honor the Lieut. Governor be asked to forward the memorial to
the Governor-General-in-Council.
Adjournment of the House took place
at 10:50.
Source:
Regina Leader, 1896-1904. Digitized by Google Books.
Cet individu a participé aux :
