THURSDAY, 24TH March, 1870.
On the House going into Committee of the Whole on the Confederation Resolution,
Mr. DECOSMOS moved the following resolution :—" That in the
opinion of this Council it is expedient, in order to foster commerce, to
admit, duty free, into this Colony or some portions thereof, certain
articles of foreign merchandise not produced in the Dominion or this Colony,
and that provision for the admission of the same be made in the terms of Union
with Canada." In reply to a question the Hon. mover said it would be
impossible to name all the articles; but a few of them might be instanced,
such as tropical fruits, silks, and English dry
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
143 goods; he thought this the proper time to bring these
matters to the attention of the Dominion Government, believing that they
would listen to them. Some discussion ensued as to the mode in which the
different recommendations and resolutions were to be taken up.
The Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL called Hon. Members' attention to
the fact, that it had been agreed by the House that an expression of opinion
on these general principles, namely, as to the protection of agriculture, of
manufactures, and of commerce, should be taken, and that, as had been very
properly suggested by the Member for Victoria District, a general resolution
should be framed on these abstract views.
Hon. MR. ROBSON —I shall offer an amendment, because I think
the question of free port and protection should not be dealt with together.
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL —The proposition of the Hon. Member for
Victoria District is as to what shall he admitted free; the Hon. Member for
New Westminster proposes to suspend the whole tariff.
Hon. MR. ROBSON —I stated one reason why I thought it not
desirable to put the two together. You cannot get the control of the tariff.
I say we want free trade in certain articles, and I say we must have the
tariff entirely re—modelled as to these articles. My difficulty is that we
were last evening discussing protection, and how far we should have the power to
deal with it. I moved an amendment which was, I think, the only
constitutional way of dealing with the question, and in answering certain
propositions of Hon. gentlemen yesterday, I endeavoured to deal with
protection,
per se. I listened with interest to
what fell from the Hon. Commissioner of Customs, and I do not like to set my
opinion against his on matters of this kind, on which I know he is an
authority, especially when I find him backed by the Hon. Attorney-General and
Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works. I instanced the United States of
America, and said that they are a living instance of non-separation of
tariff. The Hon. Commissioner of Customs did not go so far as to say we
could frame a tariff for ourselves, but that the Dominion Government would frame it
for us. Now, Sir, I say that we must not run away with any
such idea. If we were allowed to have a different scheme of revenue,
Newfoundland would ask the same; New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and
other Provinces would all ask for exceptional tariffs, and the Federal
fiscal policy would be broken up and destroyed. Depend upon it we ought not
to run away with such an idea. The Dominion Government cannot admit of exceptional
or differential tariffs any more than the United States can do so. Some Hon.
Members say that we are not under the Organic Act, and need not be under it,
unless we choose; that there is a distinction between the relations of the
Provinces that were Confederated under the Act and those that may hereafter
come in, and that we can change the Organic Act if we think proper. I admit
that any Province not prepared to come in under the Organic Act can stay out. The
Act is not binding on us now, but it will be if we go into the Dominion. I
am surprised to hear some Hon. Members speaking lightly of a reciprocity
treaty. Look at the single item of coal. We at present only send 18,000 tons
per annum to San Francisco. I have no doubt that under a reciprocity treaty,
we should supply them with 50,000 tons a year at least, to say nothing of
anthracite coal. In the course of a few years, allowing time for trade to develop
itself, this would bring in $900,000 or, say, one million dollars a year
into the Colony. Mr. Chairman, we are now speaking of a single item, and
that, I believe, not the largest, which would bring in one million a year,
and that calculation is based upon the present consumption of coal in San
Francisco, and the consumption will no doubt increase. In addition to this, look
at the quantity of shipping, and the cheap commodities which these ships
bring in, which could hardly be brought as a measure of commerce. There are
objectors to reciprocity. No doubt it would be very nice if we could open
the United States ports to our goods, and close our ports to their goods. But
this would not be reciprocity. There is, in my opinion, only one answer to
be given. I say, give the farmers good roads, and this will be protection
for them. Now, Sir, what does the development of our coal interests mean? It
means extension of labour, and circulation of money. Farmers have at once a
full demand for their produce. Apply the same argument to lumber. Its
development would cause more money to be expended in the Colony. Every ton
of coal brought to the bank, and every tree cut down, means spending of money.
There, then, is another field opened up for what farmers have to sell. Give
the farmers this development and good roads, and they would soon find out
that reciprocity would be like the handle of a jug, on the side of British
Columbia. Depend upon it we will come in under the reciprocity treaty, and
the advantages will be so great on our side that it will hardly be reciprocity.
Nothing can be more unfair than to suppose we are to have a free market in
the United States and they have none here.
144 CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
Hon. MR. ROBSON said that at present he was replying to
remarks that had been made by other Hon. gentlemen.
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the course that the Hon.
gentleman was pursuing was embarrassing, and would tend to complicate the
question before the House, and proceeded to correct a statement which he
understood Hon. Mr. Robson to have made as to what had fallen from the Hon.
Chief Commissioner, Hon. Mr. Hamley, and himself on a previous occasion as to
the right to control tariff being in the Provinces after Union.
Hon. MR. DECOSMOS —Anyone who knows the history of the United
States knows that if any question of dealing with the tariff law in any
manner other than Federal could arise, it would be in reference to groups of
States instead of single States. I say, then, that we must consider this as
a group of Provinces of the Dominion. Many years will probably not elapse
before we see groups of States distinguished as Pacific and Atlantic, or East and
West, and North and South, in the neighbouring Republic.
Hon MR. ROBSON —I rise to move a resolution. It is the same
as that proposed at the Yale Convention by the Hon. Member for Victoria
District, in 1867.
Hon. MR. ROBSON —I have a perfect right to allude to what
took place at the little Parliament at Yale. I believe this to be the proper
way to approach the subject. The resolution which I propose is as follows :—
" That a respectful Address be presented to His Excellency the Governor recommending
that
the following may be included in the conditions of the proposed terms of Union with
Canada:
' If at any time after the admission, the Legislature of British Columbia shall pass
an Address
to the Govenor-General of Canada declaring that it is expedient to establish a free
port on the
Pacific in order to advance the interests of British commerce in the North Pacific,
the Parliament
of the Dominion to make provision for the establishment of the same.' "
It is astonishing to find what a change has come over the Hon. Mr. DeCosmos since
he
changed his city seat for a rural seat. He is becoming less capable of taking a statesmanlike
view of these things than he was two years ago. 1 think by providing that if the new
Council
shall, after due deliberation, find it desirable, that a free port shall be established
in this Colony
is, after all, the proper way. I cannot think that this House, with the small representative
element that it has, should be asked to decide this point. I say that the tendency
of the
Canadian policy is in the direction of free trade. [No, no, from the
Hon. Mr. DeCosmos.]
Hon. MR. ROBSON I
say it is, and there is a speech of Sir G. E. Cartier recently published, in which
he says that
the tendency of Canadian policy is towards free trade. Now, I believe, that a great
British
Empire is to be established on this Continent,—the Greater Britain ; and I believe
that all
British manufactures will be admitted free. If Great Britain takes her true part in
pushing
forward this Empire, she will naturally expect some advantages ; she will naturally
look for
some immediate financial result. Every unproductive labourer in England is a tax upon
the
others ; but transfer them to the Dominion and they will become producers and consumers.
I
believe it to be of the first importance that there should be a free port here. By
a free port
I do not mean that everything should necessarily be admitted free. There is no reason
why
local industries. and especially agricultural interests, should not continue to enjoy
substantial
protection. I believe the Canadian Government will readily realize the advantages
of the
policy of having a free port on the Pacific. There could be no local jealousies growing
out of it.
The Provinces on the Atlantic could not object. Our free port would attract commerce
and
wealth to the nation which they could not possibly attract, and thus enrich the nation
and
reflexly benefit all. I maintain that while the larger advantages would be local,
the general
advantages would be very considerable. I was gratified in reading a leading article
in the
Ottawa Times, the organ of the Dominion Government, in which the theory of a free port for
the Dominion on the Pacific is strongly and ably advocated ; and this article forms
a complete
answer to those who allege that the Canadian statesmen would never listen to any such
proposition. If it should be decided that a free port would conduce to the interest
of
the Province
and, consequently, to the interest of the Dominion, why should not we have it? Why
should
we object? What more glorious idea can there be than that of a British Empire extending
across the Continent, with its back to the North Pole, with its face looking Southward.
I will
not venture to say how far ; with one foot planted on the Atlantic and the other on
the Pacific,
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 145
stretching out one hand to Europe and the other to Asia, and inviting the commerce
of both
hemispheres to enter its wide open portals, free as the wind that fills the canvas.
Depend upon
it, Sir, if this is to be the true north-west passage, the gates must be thrown open.
Let us not
repel commerce, but woo it. I venture to think that the resolution which I have the
honour to
offer proposes to deal with the matter in the most statesmanlike way; and I trust
it will commend itself to the judgment, and receive the support, of all parties in
the House.
Hon. MR. HOLBROOK, whilst believing that the establishment of
a free port at Victoria might be beneficial to the interests of the Lower
Fraser, did not think it would be for the general good of the Colony. In his
opinion the agricultural interests wanted protection. For the present he
must vote against the Hon. Member for New Westminster. He thought that such
questions ought to be left to the Dominion Government.
Hon. MR. DECOSMOS —After the very, I will not say unusual,
but unexpected, remarks in reference to myself, I must crave the indulgence
of the House whilst I say a few words to set myself right. Sir, I had
something to do with the Yale Convention, and I am not ashamed of my
connection with it; my political standard was unfurled then as it is to-day. When
I first entered upon politics in this country I established a high political
standard, which would take the measure of a political trickster as well as
that of a statesman. There is nothing, in the conduct of the hon. member
for New Westminster either here or at Yale to entitle him to the name of
statesman. I say, Sir, that I am as free as I was at Yale to vote for that clause,
and if it can be got into the terms I will vote for it. I brought the
question up at Yale because I knew that there was a party in Victoria
favourable to free port, and I wished to see the question fought out after
Confederation, not before. The Hon. gentleman was defeated; he could not get
the Yale Convention to endorse the retaining of the Assay Office at New
Westminster, and he took his defeat very much to heart. [
Hon. Mr.
Robson—Untrue, untrue.]
Hon. MR. DECOSMOS The Hon. Member for Yale came to me and said :—" You
concede this point as to the Assay Office and I will yield the free port. We
don't want Mr. Robson to leave." That's how it came to be in the Yale resolutions.
Since to this Colony I came, I have never swerved from
protection. In the first article I wrote for a newspaper in this Colony the
word "protection" occurs. I want to see the Canadian revenue laws extended
here; I want to see power in the Local Government to protect the industrial interests
of the Colony. I would like to know who has changed
the Hon. gentleman's opinions. I spent my time and money in getting
protection. I challenged a gentleman on the floor of this House to retire,
and I did retire; I hoisted the flag of protection and won.
Hon. MR. BARNARD —I wish to state that what the Hon.
gentleman said was true, except that he mistook the Hon. Mr. Robson for Hon.
Mr. Holbrook.
Hon. DR.HELMCKEN —We are here to remedy evils likely to occur
from Confederation, evils which are admitted by every member of this
Council. That there is an evil even the Hon. Member for New Westminster has
admitted. [
Hon. Mr. Robson—No.]
Hon. DR.HELMCKEN The Hon. gentleman makes his net
so wide that he slips through; but he said in effect that the difficulty was
irremediable, and to get out of it he proposes not general free trade, but free
trade in certain special articles. If the Canadian Government can agree to
one they can to the other. I believe that if we show the Canadian Government
that the Canadian tariff would be an evil they will find means to remove the
evil. l believe a tariff fair and suitable to this Colony will be made. I
believe we have gone so far right; we have resolved that our agriculture shall be
protected. Now comes the question as to commerce. We want articles of
commerce as cheap as possible; our trade is chiefly retail, nevertheless it
is important, and should be fostered. I think that everything we can do to
increase the population of this country is of importance. I therefore
propose this resolution :—
" That in the opinion of this Council it is advisable that after Union foreign manufactured
"articles in which trade can be carried on with neighbouring countries shall be admitted
into
"this Colony at a low nominal rate of duty, and generally the tariff should be made
to suit
"the commercial condition of the Colony."
I think free trade in Vancouver Island would be beneficial with protection to agriculturalists,
but I do not think it desirable, except in a limited way. Does any one imagine
that if
free port was restored to Victoria her prosperity would return? In more early days,
when she
enjoyed free port, there were not the obstructions to free trade with the neighbouring
country
that there are at present. Now there are Custom House oflicers to prevent smuggling,
and a
great deal of illicit trade is checked. With regard to free trade: In former days
we were far
146 CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
more advanced than the people on the Sound ; to-day, on the Sound, trade has so far
increased
as to be almost equally as good, and I am told you can buy goods almost as cheaply
as in
Victoria, so I do not believe free port would restore our pristine prosperity. Under
free trade
it is pposed that large stocks of goods will come by Panama. or by long sea route.
But look
at the altered condition of things resulting from the Pacific Railway, and the railway
to
Columbia River, and probably on to Puget Sound. Do you imagine anyone will send large
stocks of goods to lie here? and will not people telegraph for whatever they may require,
and
bring them across the continent by railway? I say that the same prosperity and trade
that
we enjoyed before would not come back. We are told that when the railway is made Asiatic
trade will come across, but I doubt the railway being made in our time, and, if it
is, ships
will go wherever the railway terminus is and that will not be here. It would be an
advantage to have some articles free, silks, tric tracs, &c. Make Victoria the Paris
of
the Coast
and we may do something. And this brings me to the observation of my Hon. friend on
my
right, that more frequent steam communication with the Sound would be productive of
much
good to trade. What I want to say is that the persons going to negotiate these terms
ought
to be able to state that this Colony requires restrictions in the tariff. I do not
intend to be
factious, but I do intend to show to the Canadian Government what we consider best
for this
country, and that without certain terms we believe Confederation will be bad. What
use is it
to attempt to deceive Canada? She knows what is being done, and if not, there are
those here
who would tell her. It is our duty to show the Canadian Government that there are
things
we desire. Of what use is the country to Canada unless it is populated? She wants
people,
not terms. We must show what will be the advantages of Confederation. If the tariff
of the
Dominion must come here it will be unsuitable to us—an admitted evil. If this cannot
be
remedied, Confederation is likely to be put off for years. I merely mean to elicit
the feeling of
this House on the subject of whether we can take off certain duties. If commerce can
be
protected in the way we desire, as we shall see when the persons who go to arrange
the terms
come back, then it will be no use to oppose Confederation. If the evil is still to
exist, then
there will be opposition.
Hon. DR. CARRALL —I shall vote against the Resolution. With
regard to free port, I do not say 1 am opposed to it or in favour of it ;
but I do say that the Canadians will say if we pass this Resolution, "What
kind of people are these that passed a Resolution yesterday in favour of
protection, and to-day desire free port?" The Hon. Member for Victoria City
proved forcibly, I will not say conclusively, that free port would not be
beneficial. His reasoning is consistent ; and it is eminently
characteristic of the honourable gentleman.
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN —I desire to explain the terms of my
Resolution—the latter part. If the Canadian tariff rules our farmers are
ruined.
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN —Bring the Canadian tariff here and you
take away protection and tax the farmers for all they consume.
Hon. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS —A free port is an
impossibility. unless the English Parliament repeal the Act of Union. This
Act enacts that British Columbia tariff laws shall prevail.
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN —I believe a free port could be carried on
if, you could wall in an acre or two of this city. and not do any injury to
manufacturing interests, or any other interests. I mean to say that upon
that acre people might expose their goods—make it one large bonded
warehouse.
Hon. DR. CARRALL —We have heard of the pernicious effects in
prospective of the Canadian tariff. I maintain that it will protect the
principal, that is the pastoral, interests better than what is proposed by
some honourable members. The admission of cereals free will be counterbalanced by
the additional protection afforded to the farmers'
horses and cattle, and the cheaper rate for goods.
Hon. ATTORNEY—GENERAL —I wished to gather the opinion of the
House before expressing my opinion on this question. I regret
much, and am sure that this House will join me in a feeling of regret. that
my honourable colleague, the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works, is,
unfortunately, absent from his place on account of indisposition, for I am aware
that this is a subject to which he has given much consideration, and I would
have been glad that the House should have had the benefit of his opinion on
this very serious question, for it is
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
147 impossible to approach the subject without feeling its
vital importance; and I think it would tax our united will and energy to
their utmost limits, if we had the power to frame a tariff which would be
suitable; therefore, I see, wisely, in all the Resolutions a wide generality.
Upon this question of tariff we must especially avoid attempting to commit
the Dominion Government to any fixed principle. The tariff cannot be part of
the terms, but it is. undoubt edly. a matter of consideration to be urged on
the Canadian Government. Though we have assented to the Organic Act. we have
not shut ourselves out from going to the Dominion Parliament to ask for
remedies which they can give to us, and to ask them to find a remedy which
will make Confederation acceptable 'to this Colony. Therefore. I think, with the
Honourable Chief Commissioner, that one general Resolution upon
this subject, after dealing with. the three separate Resolutions or abstract
principles, may, with advantage, be passed by this House. I think also, with
that honourable gentleman, Mr. Chairman, that Canadian statesmen who will
have to deal with this matter. will do so with wisdom. They, in considering the
terms when other Provinces have entered the Confederation, must have
experienced some of these difficulties which now come to us for the first
time. No doubt many honourable members of this House have given great
consideration to this question. yet I think that Canadian experience will
help us. Much has been said on free port—much for and against. My own
tendencies, since first I had a seat on this floor, in another Assembly, have been
in favour of free port. I voted for it then, but I feel that I am obliged to
vote against it now. The Imperial Government will not sanction anything
which is in effect a differential duty in the same tariff; but this is
distinct from the question of a separate tariff for British Columbia. Other
considerations will naturally strike Canada, and I think if free port was made a
sine qua non she would refuse
Confederation altogether. as she would not like to run the risk of entering
into difficulties and disputes of a fiscal character with her great and powerful
neighbour. which might possibly arise out of smuggling. Another difficulty
in dealing with this matter that we have to encounter is, that we have
information that a reconstruction of the Canadian tariff is at present
going on, and there is some chance of a reciprocity treaty being arranged,
therefore we cannot put forward any fixed principles. The main objections of
the Dominion to a separate tariff, it strikes me, will be found to be:
first, that they are afraid of infringing principle: and, second, the
formation of a precedent for a special tariff, which might cause Newfoundland,
New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and other Provinces to ask for special tariffs
to suit their particular circumstances, and to avoid the
inconvenience of possible hostile tariffs. There are certainly many
plausible reasons to be found in favour of a special tariff for British Columbia.
Such as the difficulty of communication. The want of either road or railway,
and the security against smuggling into Canada. But the probability is, that
protection to commerce would be secured by the reconstruction of the
Canadian tariff, and I regard the framing of a tariff now which would apply
satisfactorily to our altered circumstances, under such a thorough change as
Confederation would bring, a matter of impossibility. Formerly, when there was a
free port at Victoria, it was always in danger, and the Hon. Senior Member
for Victoria City, then the Speaker of the Vancouver Island House of
Assembly, was always afraid of. every little impost on stock or produce lest
it should infringe upon the principle of free trade. and at last it was so
loaded with dues and charges that before the Union the principle of free port
was destroyed. But I see no reason why, when we are going into a
partnership, we should not arrange the best terms we can; and I think that
the differences could be altered in favour of this Colony. and in favour of
Confederation generally. We have no power ourselves; that is the reason this
question is not brought up in the terms. We must see what eltect Union will
have on this Colony first; we must see how the thing works before we decide
finally. At the same time. we must take care that we protect such important
interests as agriculture and commerce from haste or injurious delay. I will,
therefore, as soon as the terms are settled. propose a resolution which will
meet this difficulty and give time to see what change, if any, the country
may require. In sending our resolutions to the Canadian Government, we must
not suppose that we have exhausted the subject. Many points must arise when
the Canadian Commissioners come here, or ours go there—if the matter take that
turn; but we should be careful not to overload the terms, lest we should
endanger the cause of Confederation altogether. We must have some faith in
the Dominion Government—in Canada and Canadian statesmen. We must not
forget that their own interests would be ours. I say nothing with regard to
the latter part of the resolution of the Hon. Member for Victoria
148
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. City, except that it does not accord
with his usual startesmanlike views. I shall offer no opposition to the
latter part of the resolution of the Hon. Member, but I cannot support the
whole. If anyone will move an amendment to leave out the latter part, I will
support it.
Hon. MR. DECOSMOS—We have three propositions now before the
House—my own, and those of the Hon. Members for Victoria and New
Westminster. The former divides the subject. I think they would both act
judiciously if they withdrew the question of free port.
Hon. DR. CARRALL moved an amendment to strike out the latter
part of the resolution of the Hon. Member for Victoria.
Hon. MR. RING suggested that the amendment should be
deferred. These amendments so qualify the general principles that I must
decline voting for any one of them.
Hon. Mr. WOOD —Sir, I do not intend to express my opinion on
free trade or protection, but I intend to vote; and I think my Hon. friend
(Mr. Ring) might consider that he is not. pledged to any particular course
by his vote. I give my vote in order that the question may he brought before
the Canadian Government, and ultimately before the people of this Colony.
Hon. MR. RING —I have great respect for the opinion of the
Hon. and learned gentleman; but the resolution of the Hon. Member for New
Westminster pledges us to the Organic Act, whicn I decline to endorse. We
are entitled to our own free port and to the regulation of our own tariff.
Hon. Mr. ROBSON — I hope the Hon. Member will remain while I
set him right. My resolution only asks that a Representative Council here,
after due deliberation, shall have power to decide upon this question. I
consider that the name of free port is attractive; this, under the
resolution of the Hon. Member for Victoria District, we should lose, We must not
regard the Canadian tariff entirely unprotective. It is wrong. it is untrue,
to state that the Canadian tariff is such a great evil, and I maintain that
it would not he an evil, but an actual good; but that is no reason we should
not seek to make it a greater good.
The Clerk read the resolution of Hon. DeCosmos, the amendment of Hon. Robson, the
amendment of Hon. Dr. Helmcken, and the amendment of Hon. Dr. Carrall.
By the leave of the Committee. the amendment of the Hon. Mr. Robson was withdrawn,
in order that it might be brought up as a substantive motion. .
On a division, the motion of Hon. Dr. Carrall was carried, and the original resolution
of
Mr. DeCosmos was lost.
The Hon. Mr. Robson then moved his resolution, to which the Hon. Mr. Humphrey's moved
an amendment,
Amendment and resolution were lost.
"That in the opinion of this Council. the duties of excise levied upon maltstel's
and
"brewers under the Excise Laws of Canada would be detrimental if made applicable to
British
"Columbia. and that His Excellency he requested to take such steps as he may deem
advisable
" for the interest of this Colony, and further to take care that no export duties
shall be charged
" on spars exported from British Columbia."
And I would remark, in doing so, that excise as levied under the Canadian system,
is
very hoary indeed; there is duty. licence, and excise. The result would he to the
brewing
interests. in all probability, total extinction; for on an increasing trade the duty
would he so
high as to check trade in this direction. The other part of the resolution is in respect
to logs,
the duty on which is $1 per thousand on saw-legs; but whether a spur or a mast, it
is regarded
still as a log. Thus the Canadian tariff would seriously interfere with our industry,
and interfere with getting out masks and spars.
Hon. DR. CARRAL —I think the Hon. and learned Member for
Victoria City is under a misapprehension when he includes spurs with logs.
If "logs" refers simply to saw-logs, I cannot see that the spar husin ss
would he affected.
Hon. ATTORNEY GENERAL —I must confess, Sir, that I do not see
the object of this clause, I don't think there is any need for alarm. I have
lived for some years in Canada, and when I think of the Canadian statesmen.
who will look at British Columbia without regard to party politics such men.
for instance, Sir J, A, Macdonald, Sir Francis Hincks, Sir A. T. Galt, Mr,
George Brown. and the various statesmen accustomed to deal with these
things—I feel confident that we are safe in their hands; therefore, I hope that
the Hon, and learned Member will not imagine that, in voting.r against this
motion, we are voting against the interests he so properly wishes to protect.
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 149
Hon. MR. RING —The Hon. Attorney-General seems to think that
these honourable men may live forever. He forgets that in the progress of
time other men will take the lead in public affairs.
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN —lt is a most important question. The
Canadian Government ought to know what we think of it. The brewing interest
would disappear, and it is large in proportion to our population, and to
ruin it would be doing an injury. I hope the Hon. Attorney-General will
withdraw his opposition and let this recommendation go with the others to
the Governor, that he may forward it with them to the Canadian Government. At the
time the Organic Act was made it related to contiguous Provinces. The Hon.
Attorney-General says they may not put it in force here for ten, twenty, or
thirty years. Granted, but it may also he put in force immediately. I say,
then, let the Canadian Government he made aware that the application of the
excise laws to this Colony will be detrimental to its interests.
Hon. DR. CARRALL —I think the Hon, Member loses sight of one
fact He is terribly afraid of the Canadian tariff, but he loses sight of the
fact that barley comes in duty free. I believe the whole system will be
carefully revised, and it is absurd to hamper the terms of the resolution
for such a petty question.
Hon. MR. DRAKE —1n reply, I think our duty in coming here is
to protect the interests of the Colony. We ask the Dominion Government to
consider these things. We do not insist on terms being inserted. I do not
ask for this only; I desire to draw the attention of the Canadian Government
to these interests that they may not be overlooked. As to these interests
being petty and small, that is our misfortune; but let us not lose sight of them
for that reason. As for Americans coming here to cut down our legs, I say
let them come. If I can alter my resolution to suit the Attorney-General, I
will do it.
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL —If I thought the interests of the
Colony would suffer, I would consent to bring the subject before the
Canadian Government, but I think we have nothing to fear.
Hon. Dr. HELMCKEN —If you ruin the threwing interest, you
inflict much harm in other ways Brewers consume one million pounds of harloy
yearly. This is 700 acres of land which must be cultivated. To ruin this
will throw out of employment at large number of people and close up our
breweries.
Hon. MR. DECOSMOS —I see no objection to sending this up, but
not to make it a
sine qua non. I believe
the Canadian Government will protect all these interests. Brewing is not of
sufficient magnitude to kill Confederation.
Hon. MR. ROBSON —I must oppose it logs are left in. l think
it may be our duty to protect spars and logs.
The Clerk then read Hon. Mr, Drake's motion, as altered. Carried.
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL —I think it is now competent for me to
more the resolution proposed by the Hon. Chief Commissioner.
"Resolved, That this Council respectfully represent to I is Excellency the Governor that,
"in negotiating the terms of union of British Columbia with Canada, it is of the first
import"ance to point out to the Government of the Dominion that the circumstances
of this
Colony
" are in many respects so different from those of the Eastern Provinces that the application
of
" the present Canadian Tariff to this Colony, while reducing the aggregate burden
of taxation,
"would injuriousiy affect the agricultural and commercial interests of this community,
and
" that it he therefore urgently impressed upon that Government that it is absolutely
necessary
"to our wellbeing under Confederation that special rates of Customs duties and special
"Customs regulations be arranged for this Colony in such name' as may be found practically
" most advisable, so as to secure, while our requirements in this respect remain as
at present,
" an equal measure of protection to our agricultural products and of facility to commerce,
as
"are provided under the existing British Columbia Tariff."
The resolution was carried unanimously. Â
The original motion of the Hon. Mr. DeCosmos, on the Orders of the Day, was read,
and
by leave withdrawn.
150
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
Hon. Mr. Drake's motion was also withdrawn.
Hon. Mr. Holbrook's motion was put and lost.
Hon. Mr. Robson's motion was put and lost.
"That in the consideration of the subsidies to be given by Canada to this Colony,
due
"weight shall be given to the advisability of abolishing the present road tolls on
the Yale- " Cariboo road, and also to make provision for funds to keep the same in
repair."
I put this in consequence of the suggestions thrown out by the Hon. Chief Commissioner.
I think these road tolls have done more towards making bankrupts than any over-trading.
They are main trunk roads, and I think they ought to be kept up by the Dominion Government.
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL —I am not aware that that is the result
of a suggestion of the Hon. Chief Commissioner, I am aware of his views, and
I believe he has doubts as to whether roads can he maintained by a
Government so far removed as Canada.
Hon. MR. BARNARD —I would suggest that this be laid over till
the Hon. Chief Commissioner be here
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL —The Hon. Chief Commissioner would not
object to any conclusion of the House on this matter, But I caution Hon.
Members not, by the addition of these suggestions, so to overload the
resolutions as to break down the whole of them
Hon. MR. BARNARD —I move that the Committee rise and report
progress, in order that the matter may he laid over until the Hon. Chief
Commissioner is in his place.
Committee rose and reported progress.
Cet individu a participé aux :
