[APRIL 21, 1897] 1030
SUBSIDY OF THE NORTH-WEST TERRITORIES.
Copies of all letters, petitions, memorials and
suggestions received by the Government, or any
member thereof, since the 23rd June, 1896, to
amend the North-west Territories Act with a
view of enlarging the powers of the executive of
the North-west Territories and to increase the
subsidy of the North-west Territories.
He said : This is a motion of a character
such as I have from year to year brought before the House, sometimes with successful
results and sometimes without anything
being accomplished. Last session, my hon.
friend from Alberta (Mr. Oliver), brought
forward a motion of a similar kind and
nothing resulted from it. Subsequently, a
session of the North-west Assembly was
held and a memorial was passed which was
forwarded to the Dominion Government.
That memorial asked for several things,
that there is no sign so far that the Government intends to grant. During last session,
in regard to one part of the question that
that memorial deals with, a member of the
executive of the North-west Territories
came down to Ottawa, and one of the papers
in the Territories had an article on the subject, in which it said :
Mr. Ross's first visit furnishes the Government
a fair occasion to prove that the new-born confidence of the people in the Territories
has not
been misplaced. The attitude of the late Government towards our legislative assembly
was of
late years most unfriendly. Year after year, the
chairman of the executive journeyed to Ottawa
to lay the fair and just claims of the North-west
Territories before the Government, and year after
year these just claims were contemptuously disregarded. The assembly appealed time
and again
lfor some definite subsidy, to do away with the
ihand-to-mouth system, and allow the framing
and institution of a progressive policy for the administration of local affairs. A
deaf ear was
turned to these appeals. Mr. Laurier has thus
an early opportunity to demonstrate that he intends to deal justly and generously
by the Territories.
Well, Sir, nothing was done last session by
the Government of the Prime Minister who
was thus appealed to by name, and there
does not appear any evidence, from the
Queen's Speech or from the Estimates now
before us, that there is an intention of doing
anything. There is, however, plenty of
time for the Government to reconsider its
position, and to decide to do something to
show itself, as we are told by that paper,
more generous than the previous Government. Let me say, Mr. Speaker, in justice
to that previous Government, that everything that was done for the North-West
1031
[COMMONS] 1032
Territories was done by them. They have       Â
done a great deal in the Territories. and      Â
from time to time. at my instance. they did        Â
advance the bounds of the powers of the        Â
North-west Territories. and they did other          Â
things for us. not merely at my instance in
regard to these other things. but at the instance of myself and my colleagues, and
those of us who went to wait on the Government as petitioners. But, Mr. Speaker,
it was on the floor of this House that we
accomplished the giving to the North-west
Territories of what was properly described
in this House last session by the hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver), and as described
in this memorial passed by the
legislative assembly: as practically responsible government. In 1887 the Lieutenant-
Governor of these Territories was a Czar.
and the assembly had practically no power
whatever; but in 1887 the Territories were
represented in this House, and from that
moment the members of this Parliament
moved in the direction of giving responsible
government to the Territories. One of these
members from the North-west Territories
had a Bill on the paper providing that full
responsible government be given to the Ter
ritories, and thereupon, Sir John Macdonald
brought down a Bill under which he gave
us what was called an advisory council.
That advisory council was found not to
work well, nor did it give such power as
should have been given to the Territories.
and so we subsequently got what was called
an executive committee. That executive
committee had most of the powers of the
government of a province, but the means
of getting it into existence is awkward, and
the means of continuing it, if one of its
members should be destroyed by death or,
resign, is also awkward. You have not,
properly speaking, a responsible government
there, although you have all the powers,
with two or three exceptions, that are given
to the provinces. For instance, under the
present system I do not think you could
possibly have party government. I do not  Â
think you could raise party issues under the
present conditions, if it were found desirable to do so; because these four men
are not a. government chosen by one man
who is asked to construct. a government
for the Lieutenant—Governor, but they are
chosen by the assembly, and although there
is one first among them called the chairman
of the executive committee, nevertheless, he
has not at all the power of a Prime Minister. I may tell you that the memorial
passed unanimously in the assembly, and I
wish to call the attention or the Government
here to what it says :
The assembly is of the opinion that to remedy
this undesirable state of things—
Which I have just now described.
—it is not necessary to have recourse to granting a full provincial status.
You will observe, Mr. Speaker, that the
assembly does not want to have the full provincial status given to them. I am not
going to discuss that. Probably I do not know why they do not want it; perhaps I cannot
gather from the debates why they do not want it. I myself now hold the same opinion
which I held in 1887: that the best thing that could be done for these Territories
would be to give them full responsible government. That is my opinion.
but when you have the whole assembly of
the North-west Territories stating that they
do not want full responsible government,
it would be very improper on the part of
a member of this House. and very improper even if this whole House were unanimous,
to force full responsible government
upon them. Therefore. although I have not
changed my own opinion. I am not here
to-day to ask for anything more than the
people of the Territories have themselves
asked for. I shall point out later on the
very important consequences that follow
fiom their not asking for full responsible
government. When the change was made
by the late Government shortly before it
went out of power. whereby the amount of
money placed at the disposal of the Northwest Territories Assembly was given en
bloe, and not voted as a specific vote, a
course should then have been taken by
legislation to devise a safeguard which no
longer exists in consequence of that change.
It is, of course, necessary to have certain
safeguards-for instance, over the expenditure of money ; because the Government of
the North-west Territories has its pupil-like
character of which it has no wish to divest
itself; and we, in voting the money, must
be in a position to ask this Government to
show us how every farthing of the money
has been spent, and whether it has been
properly and judiciously expended ; that is,
of course, speaking broadly.
Now, they want two things—they want a
change in the powers they exercise, and
they want a larger subsidy.
They 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.
I have described what they have at present, and of that the memorial says :
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. Â
As in the present more developed state of the
country, which has as much or more need for an
intelligent and permanent administration and
supervision of its resources 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 administering
of
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 ad
vising with relation to expenditure only. They
cannot, however, be sure that in taking the only
1033 [APRIL 21, 1897] 1034
possible steps within their power to meet the necessity, they have not exceeded their
powers.
That is a very important thing. There is to
my mind, as there is evidently to the minds
of the whole assembly, a clear doubt whether, in adopting ordinances providing a
modus vivendi, so to speak, they have not
exceeded their powers ; because they are to
some extent in the position of an inferior
assembly amending the legislation of this
supreme Dominion Parliament. Besides,
the memorial points out :
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.
Now, what they suggest is, that the Parliament should amend the section of the Northwest
Territories Act of 1891 (54 and 55 Victoria) which is substituted for section 13 of
the North-west Territories Act, chapter 50 of the Revised Statutes. That is the section
which defines the powers of the assembly, and enumerates the various subjects on which
it may legislate. They suggest that in that section this change should be made :
The legislative assembly shall exclusively have power to make ordinances for the government
of the organized Territories in relation to the classes of subjects next hereinafter
mentioned, that is to say.
While Parliament cannot divest itself of its paramount right of legislation in the
Territories, it is desirable that it should not, as it often has done, unintentionally
perhaps, by legislation partly or wholly repeal the powers given to the Territories
under that section 13, as may easily be done under the law as it is at present.
Then they suggest that we should add a clause to the North-west Territories 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. The object of that
is this. You have given them the right over property and civil rights. They can legislate
on subjects dealt with by this Real Property Act. They have already made ordinances
on those subjects. I am not sure that you have not on your Table at the present moment
a Bill dealing with matters of this kind. But it is palpable that, if their ordinances
varies in the least from the legislation of this Parliament on that subject, it is
ultra vires. So that what they ask for there is, I think, reasonable, and what the
Government can hardly refuse, if it intends that the powers given them shall not be
illusory.
Then, they suggest the repeal of section 17 of the North-west Territories Act of 1894,
and to insert :
There shall be a council to aid and advise in
the government of the Territories, to be styled
the executive council of the Territories, and such
council shall be composed of such persons and
under such designations as the Lieutenant-Governor shall from time to time think fit.
It is palpable that this is a demand for
responsible government pure and simple ;
and if you grant that request, the only
difference between the Territories and the
provinces would be that under clause 13
the assembly of the Territories would be
deprived of the authority to legislate on
one or two subjects, and one or two other
powers which a provincial legislature has—
for instance, the power to borrow money ;
but maugre these two or three subjects,
you would give them responsible government
if this third request were granted.
Then, they wish to have sub-clause C of
subsection 7 of section 13 repealed—that
which relates to insurance companies. They very properly say that there is no reason
for depriving an assembly of men who are just as intelligent, enlightened and experienced
as the men in any assembly of any province, of the power of giving a charter to an
insurance company. It is palpable that that very elementary right of a civilized community
should be within their power.
Then they wish to have inserted a clause in the North-west Territories Act giving
to the Lieutenant-Governor in Council the power to appoint sheriffs, and so on. That
is a mere detail, and I do not attach much importance to it. If the Government go
as far as the Act, they will probably give them these powers.
Then, they suggest that, subject to conditions, the following subsection should be
inserted :—
The establishment, maintenance and management or hospitals, 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.
Now, you will see that in the Estimates
brought down, on page 67, under the head
of "Government of the North-west Territories," you have "Insane patients, Manitoba,
$30,000." What happens at present is this, that any insane patients we have are sent
to Manitoba, and there is no reason whatever why we should not take charge of our
own insane. Lunatics from the Territories are, under an agreement between the federal
authorities and the province of Manitoba, which expires in 1898, sent to the asylums
of that province, and at present there are in such asylums 74 persons costing one
dollar per day. Surely the assembly is only rational in contending that they could
perform such service as well and more cheaply than Manitoba. An insane man is found
in some part of the Territories, and instead of sending him to an asylum in
1035
[COMMONS] 1036
Calgary, or Regina or Moose Jaw, or Medicine Hat—wherever the asylum might be—
he is sent 300 or 400 miles further into
Manitoba, and the clumsy expedient is used
of charging the Territories with the cost,
under the agreement by which the Manitoba institution takes charge.
As regards hospitals, the assembly already
provides, as far as its means will allow, for
the assistance of a hospital built and kept by
private charity, and we have at Medicine
Hat and at Calgary a magnificent hospital
in each place. We have a hospital at Medicine Hat due to the enterprise and philanthropy,
in the main, of John Niblock—a
hospital which, I have no doubt, some of
my friends on both sides of the House have
visited and which all who have visited it
must admit is not merely a credit to Mr.
Niblock's energy and philanthropy, but to
the philanthropy of the North-west Territories also and the passenger public, because
there are wards in it that illustrate the
benevolence of those who have visited it
from time to time. And let me say, in pass- Â
ing. that I greatly regret, when I bring forward a subject of this kind, that we have
not the Minister of the Interior in his place.
There is a just claim on the part of this
hospital, outstanding now for some years
against the Department of the Interior, and
I have strong hopes that the Minister of the
Interior will do it the justice of seeing that
this claim is paid.
The assembly also wants the repeal of
section 21 of the North-west Territories Act
of 1894 and that an Act should be introduced respecting roads and road allowance of
the North-west Territories, with similar provisions to those contained in chapter
49 of
the Revised Statutes of Canada respecting
roads and road allowance in Manitoba. The
object of this is to do away with the uncertanties and difficulties connected with
the
laying out, improving and acquiring roads
by expropriation and to give to the assembly
the right to delegate such powers to municipalities.
Then they desire that a clause should he
added giving the assembly the power to repeal, alter, vary or re-enact the provisions
for the appointment of justices of the peace
and their qualifications. That question,
however. is one of detail which I am not going to discuss. because if the Government
decide to do the large things asked for, that
will follow, no doubt, as a matter of course.
The other large subject dealt with by this
memorial of the assembly is the subject of
finance. That has been from time to time
placed before this House. It was ably
placed before us last session by my hon.
friend from Alberta (Mr. Oliver), and nothing new has since taken place that would
add to the arguments which he put before
this House. I shall just call attention to
what the memorial contains on that subject.
At present, if you look at the Estimates,
you will find that the main grant is for
schools, clerical assistance, printing, &c.;
and as the hon. member for Alberta pointed out last session, the chief thing to be
provided, out of that $242,000 is schools.
This is what the memorial says on that
point:
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 and proportionately to the 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 favourable 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.
Let me call the special attention of the Government now to this argument on behalf
of
our claim for a larger subsidy:
In 1891, the population was 66,769; the number
of schools in operation was 224. In 1892, the
number of schools in operation was 237, and the
parliamentary grant was $208,700. In 1895, the
number of schools was 341, being an increase in
four years of over 52 per cent. In 1896, the population was 104,221, or 10 per cent
per year added to the census of 1894, being the ratio of increase between 1891 and
1894, and the grant from
Parliament was $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 the last four years of 16 per
cent.
Mr. DAVIN. $25,000. Thus while the
population increased 56 per cent. the increase of the annual grant was only a little
over one-quarter of that.
Now, in the Territories the conditions of
the Government are somewhat analogous to
those of Manitoba; and, therefbre, a comparison between Manitoba and the Territories
is a natural one. Nothing could be
more natural than that we should ask, as
we asked in 1887 as we asked in 1888, and
in 1889, and in 1890, and in 1891, and every
year including last year through my hon.
friend from Alberta (Mr. Oliver), that we
should be treated on precisely the same footing as Manitoba. Now, if we were so
treated what would be the result ? The
population of the Territories in 1891 according to the census of that year, was 66,799.
According to the census taken by the Northwest Mounted Police in 1894, the population
was 86,851. According to that ratio of increase. namely, 30 per cent, the population
in 1897 is 112,906. Now. if we were treated
on the same basis as Manitoba, according
1037 [APRIL 21, 1897] 1038
to subsection B of section 5, of chapter 46,
of the Revised Statutes of Canada, the per
capita grant would be calculated on an approximate estimate of the population two
and one-half years from 1897, which, at the
rate of increase that I mentioned in an
earlier part of my remarks, namely, 10 per
cent a year, would be 141,132. Now, the
per capita grant of 80 cents a head for 141,132 would give you the sum of $112,905.
Then on the debt account, on a presumably
actual population in 1887 of 141,132, the
amount would be 5 per cent on $32.44 per
head, making $183,133. An amount for the
support of government and legislation is
given to Manitoba of $50,000 a year. Is
there any reason why we should not get
$50,000 also for the same purpose ? No
reason whatever. Then, Manitoba has been
held to be entitled to an indemnity of
$100,000 a year, because the administration
of its lands it withheld from it. But what
are the lands of Manitoba compared with
the lands of the North-west Territories ?
What are the claims, therefore, of Manitoba as compared with the claims of the
North-west Territories in this particular ?
The Territories, of course, have a much
stronger claim to compensation, inasmuch
as besides the land grants to railways in
and for the Territories, what has been done
with our lands ? Why, Sir, we have been
a quarry to which they have come from
every quarter to get land grants.
way seeks a land grant, it always looks to
the North-west Territories. Land grants
have been given for the general benefit of
Canada, and for the special benefit of the
eastern provinces and British Columbia ;
land grants have been given within the Territories for railways constructed for and
in
Manitoba for which no sufficient land grant
could be found in that province. The province of Manitoba has been given all lands
designated as swamp lands. Now, if you
come to consider what should be given us
we should get a far larger grant than
$100,000 on this account. It really ought to
be $30,000. But suppose you only add $50,000 to what is given to Manitoba, and you
get a land grant that should be given us of $150,000. So the amounts we should get
would be :
| Provincial subsidy................. |
$112,903 |
| Debt account................. |
183,133 |
| Support of government and legislation... |
50,000 |
| On account of lands......... |
150,000 |
| Making a total of.............. |
$496,038 |
And what do we get here in these Estimates after this matter has been-
Mr. DAVIN. I am giving the hon. gentleman a calculation that is not now given in
this House for the first time. It was given here last session, it was given even before
that. I am referring to the same calculation made in the memorial that has been transmitted
to the Government after having been passed unanimously in the North-west assembly.
Mr DAVIN. These are the figures in the memorial.
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES. The hon. gentleman referred
to the speech made by the hon. member for
Alberta (Mr. Oliver), and I was not sure
whether he was reading from that speech
or from the memorial.
Mr. DAVIN. I referred to the fact that
my hon. friend (Mr. Oliver) had brought
this matter before the House, as had been
done every year. But I wish to point out
that $150,000, the sum I have last mentioned, was not mentioned in the memorial.
The memorial points out that Manitoba gets
$100,000 and says that we are entitled to
more. but does not mention a sum. To
reach an aggregate, I supposed that it
should be made $150,000. So, instead of
$242,000, we should get $496,000. I pointed
this out, two years ago, I think, when the
present Government was not in power, and
when my hon. friend was sitting in Opposition—and at that time I got help from hon.
gentlemen who are now sitting, as the
Prime Minister says, enthroned like the
Olympian gods, in a place where they used
not to sit. I used to get help from them. I
do not know whether he (Mr. Davies) gave
me help, but there were gentlemen on that
side who used to give me help in contending for what I did contend for from year
to year. And, in fact, two years ago, we
had more than a million dollars due us by
the Dominion Government. If we had a
commission such as sat the other day in regard to taxation in Ireland, it would be
found that the North-west Territories, like Ireland, had been paying a large amount
of taxation that we ought not to have had to pay.
Mr. COCHRANE. Do not suggest a commission, or we shall have one.
Mr. DAVIS. This would not be a very
expensive commission, and its work would
not take very long. The calculation is
easily made, because we have all the facts.
And if my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries will only make the calculation,
he will easily reach the result. Let
him for a moment fancy that he has taken
a brief for the Territories. I am told by
the chairman of the executive of the Northwest Territories that something like this
memorial has been sent to every member
1039
[COMMONS] 1040
of the Government and that they are in possession of it. Let the hon. gentleman read
that. I know he is an able lawyer,—let him
fancy that we have given him a brief and
put a large fee in his pocket and that he is
to make out a case for us. Let him read
it in that light and he will be perfectly
astonished what a case he can make out for
the Territories and against the lethargy of
his own Government, because this is the
second session. and. apparently, up to the
present. they have done nothing.
Mr. DAVIN. It will be carried in a short
time. By the way, what mavis singing-
bird was that I heard? Now, I have something to suggest that I think will be welcomed
by every territorial statesman, I mean
the members of the provincial assembly,
and it will be welcomed by every man who
has the interests of the Territories at heart.
I doubt, Sir, if there is any arrangement;
that has been made by this Parliament that
has worked more successfully and to better
advantage than the arrangement that was
made by the Parliament of Canada that we ;
should have an Auditor General perfectly
independent of the Government of the day. Â
I think it has been a great advantage to the
people, it has been in the interests of economy, and I believe it has been of advantage
to the Government in the past, and
is an advantage to the Government to-day,
so far as they desire to act economically.
Now, let us suppose that the Government
intends to accede to the prayer of this me-:
morial, and to give the North-west Territories the kind of government they demand;
but even if they do not do that, what I
am now about to suggest that they should
do is to provide an auditor that will be
appointed by the Government of Canada,
and will be perfectly independent of the,
Government of the Territories. Of course,
when the time comes that a full provincial
government would be given to the Territories, that arrangement would cease, and
we would expect that the Territorial Assembly, when it would take up its full manhood,
would re-appoint that auditor, or at
all events, appoint somebody in his place,
and continue that very useful oilicial; and
also appoint him under an ordinance
such as our Audit Act, that would make
him independent of the executive of the day.
I think that would be in the interests of the
Territories. But at the present moment,
we are bound, here in this Parliament, to
see that such an auditor exists. We have
no means at present of knowing how the
money is spent that we vote to the Territories. That executive and that assembly
are only a function of the Dominion Government as long as they do not get full
provincial autonomy. At present they
do not want full provincial autonomy, as
I have already pointed out to my hon.
friend when I quoted the memorial.
Mr. DAVIN. I do not think there will be
any necessity for it, because they do raise
money for taxation at present, that is, they
raise a local fund of $30,000.
Mr. DAVIS. By licenses; they have
a local revenue of $30,000—I think it is
about that sum. But I would like to point
out to my hon. friend that they say they
do not wish to get full responsible government. This is their language:
The assembly is of opinion, that to remedy this
undesirable state of affairs. it is not necessary to
have recourse to granting the full provincial
status.
They do not ask for it, and this memorial
passed unanimously. The money they spend
is money voted by this Parliament, and
therefore it is logical that this Parliament
know how that money is spent.
Some years ago we voted a specific sum
for all the work that was done in these
Territories, and the sums used to lapse.
I was one of the persons, with Mr. Haultain and others, who went to the Government
to get that done away with, and we
got a system adopted whereby you now
vote a block sum, such as we have here—a
grant for schools, clerical assistance. printing. &c., to be paid half—yearly in advance,
$242,000. Now, I want to see a far larger
sum voted, I want to see this House do
justice to the Territories, and vote them
a sum of $500,000, which sum is the very
least that will enable them to manage these
Territories effectively. But whether we
vote them that much or not, as we are
voting money, we ought to have an audit
independent of the executive, and an independent audit will be welcomed by the executive.
If they do not welcome it, there
is the more necessity for it; if they welcome it, then there is necessity for it,
and
it should be given at once. What we should
have is a Dominion auditor, an officer up
there paid out of the territorial fund, paid
by the executive, but whose appointment
would be independent of the executive. That
would give us an account of how the moneys
are spent that we now vote en bloc, and
we have no account of how they are spent;
whereas when we voted them in the manner
I desired to see abolished, and which I was
contributory to abolishing, we did know
how the money was spent. As long as we
vote the money, we ought to know how that
money is spent. Now, it is well known
that contracts for large sums have been
given. and I believe that it has been done
elsewhere also, within recent ,months—but
contracts for considerable sums have been
Â
1041 [APRIL 21, 1897] 1042
given without tenders being called for. Well,
if that is so, a part of this money that we
are voting is spent in that way. It may
be spent well, but we ought to know that
it is spent well, and we ought to have an
auditor to overhaul that. I am not sure
that we should go beyond our function if
we were to insist that contracts for any
considerable amount should be invariably
based upon tenders. I hope the Government
will go into this question, I hope the Government will listen to the prayer of this
memorial, I hope the Government will give
an adequate sum, 1 hope the Government
will alter the character of the executive
and make it of a responsible character, to
the extent that they demand. But in doing
that let the Government make a constitution that will be consistent. If you make
a constitution short of perfect provincial
autonomy, such as these gentlemen desire,
and still keep them in 'statu tutelari,' then
you are bound as long as they are spending
money that we vote here. to have an officer
who will give us an account of how that
money is spent.
Mr. OLIVER. I am sure the people of
the North-west Territories will be very glad
to know that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Davin)
who has just sat down. is advocating their
interests so strongly, and I have no doubt
they will accord him almost that measure
of appreciation that he received at the late
election, in the coming election that is likely
to take place in his constituency. I do not
wish to argue all the different points he has
raised: I will only say that on the general
question the hon. gentleman and myself are
at one. namely, that the Territories are entitled to a greater measure of consideration
at the hands of this Government. I can only
hope that the hon. member will be able, by;
his arguments. so to influence those who
sit on the same side of the House as himself, that, what they were able to do when
they had the power and did not do, that is,
gran the fuller measure of justice to the Territories that the people of those Territories
desire and expect, they will support
the new Government in doing when the
opportunity arises. This question was
brought before the House on a previous occasion. It is before the Government again.
Gentlemen representing
the Government of the North-west Territories are here now. It is quite within
the knowledge of the hon. gentleman (Mr.
Davin) that members of that Government
are here for the purpose of claiming additional subsidy and additional powers. I
should like to point out to the House that
while the hon. gentleman made a lengthy
appeal on behalf of the memorial which
those hon. gentlemen are advocating, he also
made an insinuation against the gentlemen
themselves, and thereby attempted to weaken their case with the Government of the
day, for he insinuated that the Government
of which they are the head was not spend
ing the money in its hands in a manner that
was for the best interest of the country and
the people, and that they had to be watched
in fact, it was absolutely necessary they
should be watched by a special auditor appointed by this Government. 1 say that
while the hon. gentleman was, on the one
hand, declaring that their wishes should be
granted, on the other hand he was trying to
make light of the position of those gentlemen and to weaken confidence in them so
that their representations would not be
agreed to. In this case, as in others, the
hon. gentleman has been blowing hot and
cold; one reason that we have not been
able to get what we desired in the past.
I submit that the position of the Northwest Territories at the present time, in so
far as the control of the funds voted to
them by Parliament is concerned should be.
if it is not. exactly the same as that of a
province. Certain money is voted to responsible representatives of the people of the
Territories for expenditure, under the control of responsible advisers, and there
is no
reason why that Government should not
have full control of the funds, as has the
legislature of a province. When the hon.
gentleman says that the North-west Government do not ask for full provincial powers.
and advances reasons why they should not
be given control of money, which only they
can properly control, he shows a desire to
weaken and not strengthen their case. They
are the only people who can know to what
purposes this money should be applied, and
how it should be applied. When this Parliament votes money to be expended by the
Territories the control ceases or should
cease, as regards this Government as to show the money should be expended. It is
now expended by the North-west Government. and with all respect to the
hon. gentleman. I believe it will continue
to be expended on the responsibility of the
executive of the North-west Territories, and
solely on that responsibility. As to the provincial powers not asked for: Allow me
to say that there are certain powers now exercised by the Government of the North-west
exactly to the same extent as they are exercised by a province. This has been done
with
the consent of the Government here, with
the consent of Parliament, and by reason of
to continue. The first of these is the expenditure of money that comes properly within
the control of the assembly. The other
matters are in relation to education in regard to which the Government of the Territories
has as full powers as the legislature of any province: in regard to legislation with
respect to property and civil
rights, as to which the Territories have the
same rights as a province, and also in regard to municipal organization, in respect
to which also the Territories have the same
powers as a province. The points in which
they lack the power of a province are points
1043
[COMMONS] 1044
of detail rather than of principle; except
this one, that the Territories have not a
fixed subsidy, and have not power to
pledge the credit of the country for a loan.
These are rights belonging to a province,
and they are not asked by the representatives of the North-west Government. The
reason why they do not ask for a fixed subsidy is no doubt owing to the fact that
the
extent of the country and its progress
vould act against their interests rather than
in their favour if there were a fixed subsidy granted; that is to say, the country
would outgrow the subsidy so quickly that
if there were a fixed subsidy, instead of
proving advantageous it would be distinctly
disadvantageous. That is the reason why
they do not want a fixed subsidy which
would be the equivalent of a provincial subsidy, and that is the only important power
they do not ask as compared with the province of Manitoba, which occupies the same
position as the Territories as regards the
control of lands. I will not occupy the time
of the House at any greater length. but in
conclusion I will say that the gentlemen representing the North-west Territories,
who
are here now, are entitled personally to the
full confidence of the Government in any
negotiations that may take place their representations are entitled to full consideration,
and I have every confidence that they
will receive that consideration at the hands
of the Government.
Mr. DAVIN. I think we have had a
somewhat extraordinary exhibition by an
hon. gentleman who seemed to be tearing mad because he could not agree with me.
The hon. gentleman was ready to rip himself up because he had to agree with the
propositions I laid down. It was certainly
a most extraordinary position, that the hon.
gentleman on being obliged to agree with
me should have got mad. It would seem
that the only kind of speaking to which he
is accustomed is scoiding. and as he had
not an opponent, he had to scold a friend,
and some one who advocated propositions
with which he agreed. I hope the hon.
member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver) for the
credit of the North-west, will reconsider his
parliamentary demeanour. and not treat the
country to such an exhibition as we have
just had.
Mr. OLIVER. I rise to reiterate what I
stated. I agree with the general propositions of the hon. gentleman. but I resent.
and resent strongly, the mean insinuations
he conveyed against gentlemen who represent the North-west in negotiations now gong
on.
Mr. DAVIN. The hon. gentleman has not
improved his position by his explanation.
He resented something that was not in my
remarks. He became as mad as a March
hare, although this is April, because he
could not find anything in my remarks to
find fault with, and then he insinuated
something that was not in my remarks. I
referred with the greatest respect to my
friend the chairman of the executive. I
know those two gentlemen from the Northwest are here. I have never in the past,
here or elsewhere, been blinded by that extraordinary sentiment that I have seen some
persons blinded with, that they must claim
credit for this, that and the other. I have
never entertained any such feelings as that.
Anything proposed for the good of the country or for the North-west Territories, I
have
been ready to help forward ; so that when
the hon. gentleman. last session—although
I think his behaviour in a certain way then
was extraordinary for a young member-
made a motion. I rose and supported him.
I did not manifest the miserable, wretched,
insect spirit he has manifested here. and that
ranks him not on a level with hon. legislators in this chamber—
Mr. SPEAKER. I am afraid both hon.
gentlemen in their last few remarks have
'not been quite in order. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Oliver) spoke of mean insinuations
in regard to the speech of an hon. gentleman, and the hon. gentleman who is new addressing
the House is going pretty far in
the use of language which should not be
used by one hon. member to another.
Mr. DAVIN. Mr. Speaker. I am very
much obliged to you for calling me to order
at any time that I in any way transgress
the rules of this House. But, Mr. Speaker, with great respect for you—
Mr. DAVIN. I wish to know from you,
Mr. Speaker, how I was out of order.
Mr. SPEAKER. The hon. gentleman (Mr.
Davin) went beyond what I think is parliamentary decorum. Perhaps I should have
pointed out before that the hon. gentleman
(Mr. Oliver), who spoke before him, transgressed in the same way. I do not think,
however, that one transgression justifies the
orher. although perhaps one may have
caused the other.
 Mr. DAVIN. Am I to understand that it
is henceforth the rule in this House of Parliament, that it is a breach of the rules
to
say of a member that he shows a miserable insect spirit?
1045 [APRIL 21, 1897] 1046
Mr. SPEAKER. Yes. I wish to say to
the hon. member (Mr. Davin) that such is
my ruling. Language that one gentleman
would not use to another in any other place
without being ofiensive, should not be used
by one hon. member towards another in this
House. That is the simple rule which I
would like to see followed.
Mr. DAVIN. Shades of Disraeli. I wish
we had Mr. Disraeli here ; I wish we had
Mr. Gladstone here as a witness. I am very
glad to know, Sir, that the Parliament of
Canada has risen to such a high dignity
that we have a Speaker who lays down laws
that would condemn Disraeli and Gladstone——
Mr. SPEAKER. 'When a ruling has been Â
given by the Speaker, there is only one
course open to any hon. member who objects to that ruling, and that is, to appeal
to the House against the decision. I shall
not permit any more discussion upon the
ruling that I have made.
Mr. DAVIN. Well, Mr. Speaker, I won't
show an insect spirit and appeal to the
House. If I were to appeal to the House
on the subject, 1 think I would show an
insect spirit, and I suppose I do not break
the rules of the House if I refer to myself
as possibly likely to show an insect spirit.
Mr. DAVIN. Yes, and I can say in regard to the hon member for Elgin (Mr.
Casey) that I have never shown an insect
spirit, nor a worm-like nature, and I have
never growled and grovelled. I can say a
whole lot of things like that, but, Mr. Speaker, I bow entirely to your ruling. What
I hope, then, is that we shall not have apotheosized in this House the demeanour of
the hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver).
I hope that when a member comes to this
House and endeavours to do the best he can
for the country, and when he makes a proposition that an hon. gentleman opposite to
him cannot controvert', that that hon. gentleman shall not abuse him and get mad.
If
the hon. gentleman does so, I will have
henceforth to declare that that hon. gentleman shows a god-like temperament. Now
the hon. gentleman (Mr. Oliver) said that he
hoped that if I should be able to induce
this Government to bring in a Bill giving
the Territories these things asked for in
the memorial, that then hon. gentlemen on
this side of the House would be ready to
support such a measure. There is nothing
whatever in the past history of the Conservative party to indicate that any good
proposals for the North-west Territories
would not meet with as fair consideration
at their hands as it would at the hands of
the Liberal party. The most determined opponents that we have had in the past, and
the harshest critics in regard to the North-
west Territories were gentlemen—not gentlemen of an insect spirit ; but gentlemen
of magnanimous soul like the hon. member for North Wellington (Mr. McMullen) and like
the hon. member for Elgin (Mr. Casey). Sir, I have not the least doubt whatever that
if a good measure is introduced by this
Government it will require no effort on my
part to induce my friends on this side to
support it ; but you may be perfectly certain that I will use any influence I may
be supposed to have with them.
Now, with regard to the suggestion that
I have made. I suggested that there should
be an auditor in the North-west Territories,
precisely in the position of the Auditor
General here. Is the existence of an auditor such as we have here, any reflection
whatever on the present Government ?
Mr. DAVIN. I do not understand that
that there is an auditor in that position.
Mr. FOSTER. All these accounts are
audited by our auditor.
Mr. DAVIN. They were audited in that
way when we had the sums voted individually, but I am not aware that they are
audited in that way now. At any rate, we
should have an auditor in the North-west
Territories where the audit could be done
more efficiently than the present auditor
can do it. What I suggest is an auditor
there placed in precisely the same position
as our Auditor General. We have no authority in Canada that has power to give
us an auditor here except ourselves, and
if we have an auditor what matter who
gave him the independence that he possesses. It is an advantage to the Government
to have such an auditor here, and I
have often heard Sir John Macdonald say
that it was a great advantage to him to
have an auditor that was perfectly independent of the Government. And because
I suggest that we should have in the Northwest an auditor in precisely the same position
as our auditor here, an hon. gentleman
gets up and says that I made an insinuation
against these two gentlemen in the Northwest Territories. Well, Mr. Speaker, these
two gentlemen are members of that Northwest Government, and they will compare
with any two gentlemen in any provincial
executive. The head of that executive, Mr.
Haultain, is a personal friend of mine. He
is a man than whom there is not in any
Government in Canada, or in any Government in the world, one more honourable.
When I am advocating giving these gentlemen enlarged powers and larger grants of
money to spend, is it to be supposed for
one moment that I would make any suggestion that would be derogatory to them? I
am under the impression at the present
time, although I may be wrong, that there
1047
[COMMONS] 1048
is not the same audit there that there used
to be, and if there is not, then I say there
should be. I may say further, Sir, that in
performing my duty here, I have never been
afraid of what construction any person inside or outside of this House would put
upon my conduct. My record in this House,
battling for the interests of the North-west.
Territories is not the record of a man who
has shown any petty political spirit, because when my own friends were in power
I have asserted my opinions against my
party proclivities. I hope that if the present Government does not do justice to the
Territories, the members from the Territories supporting that Government shall follow
my example in that. I do not know
that we shall hear any protest from the hon.
member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver) against
the indifference of the Government he supports, to the North-west Territories. The
hon. gentleman (Mr. Oliver) professes to be
an independent, but as an hon. gentleman
on his own side of the House told me, he
professes to be an independent, but he is
the worst Grit among them.
Mr. DAVIN. No, I will not give the name.
That name is perfectly sacred with me.
Now. Mr. Speaker. I am quite surprised
that my hon. friend the Minister of Marine
and Fisheries (Mr. Davies), who is the only
member of the Government present, has not
said anything in regard to this motion.
Mr. DAVIN. The Speaker rose after the
hon. gentleman sat down.
Mr. DAVIN. I beg pardon—I did not see
my hon. friend (Mr. Dobell). I apologize to
him. Nobody recognizes more thoroughly
than I do the important part my hon. friend
plays as a member of that Government;
and, as he now comes back after doing
great things in London, it would have been
impossible for me to ignore his presence if
I had known it. But I am surprised that
no Minister rises to speak on this motion.
We have to-day what we have lately been
accustomed to have in this House, day
after day—empty Ministerial seats. We
are told that the Ministers are caucusing,
patching up Cabinet differences and Cabinet
squabbles; and while they are doing that
here, the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton)
has gone to patch up Liberal squabbles in
W'innipeg. That is why we have empty
Ministerial seats in this House. We have
only one Minister with a portfolio present,
and he was going to allow the motion to be
put without saying anything upon it. I
shall be very glad to let him say anything
now.
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND
FISHERIES. I was not going to let the
motion pass without making a remark or
two; but the hon. gentleman was rather
quick in getting on his feet, and I had not
an opportunity. The hon. gentleman has
asserted his independence in this House. I
recognize his claim to independence, but
there is this peculiarity about it, that while
he asserts his independence, he does not
support his assertion by his vote.
Mr. DAVIN. I rise to a point of order.
That is a statement of fact about myself,
and I say it is not true to fact. I say on
the contrary that I have again and again
supported my speech by my vote, and I dare
the hon. gentleman to prove what he has
stated. It is not true.
Mr. SPEAKER. The hon. member for
iWest Assiniboia (Mr Davin) has made a
statement, and unless the hon. gentleman
is prepared to controvert it. he should accept it.
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND
FISHERIES. I am not prepared to controvert it if he says that on any occasion
he voted against the Government of which
he was a supporter. I shall be particularly
pleased if he will point out the occasion, and
show us the " Hausard " in which the vote
is recorded.
Mr. DAVIN. I will satisfy the hon. gentleman.
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND
FISHERIES. Passing, then, from this matter, which does not affect the question before the House,
to the substantive motion
which the hon. gentleman has made, I quite
appreciate the importance of the subject-
matter of that motion. It is a motion for
papers relative to the claim of the Northwest Government for increased executive
powers and increased statutory allowances.
The question was brought before this House
at the first short session of this Parliament,
when my hon. friend from Alberta (Mr.
Oliver) made a lengthy statement containing
a very large amount of information on the
question, and he was supported by the hon.
gentleman who has just taken his seat (Mr.
Davin). The Government have not only
had the advantage of these statements, but
they have had the benefit of receiving
from the North-west executive a memorial setting forth in detail what the claims
of that Government are. The hon. gentleman in his speech followed very closely
the terms of that memorial—in fact. reading
iit to the House. That memorial has been
presented to the Government by Mr. Haul
1040 Â Â Â Â Â
[APRIL 21, 1897] Â Â Â Â Â
1050Â
tain and Mr. Ross, and they have had interviews with the Government, in which they
have pressed very strongly the claims they
have made. But it is obviously impossible
at the present moment to have an intelligent discussion, much less to form an intelligent
conclusion, until the papers are in
the hands of hon. members. There is no
objection to the hon. gentleman's motion
passing, but I will call his attention to the
fact that while he elaborated the importance
of an audit in the Northwest, he has ignored the fact that there is an exhaustive
audit of the vote of this House for the
North-west, made by the Auditor General
of the Dominion. and contained in his Annual Report. If the hon. gentleman will
turn to that report he will see. from page
H 15 to page H 40, the details of the expenditure which this House voted in a lump
sum. But in addition to that audit by our
auditor. there is the audit of the North-west
legislative assembly on their own behalf;
and if the hon. gentleman examines the account for last year. he will find that something
like $2,200 was expended for their
audit office. So that the hon. gentleman
may rest assured that,, whether the sum
voted is sufficient or insufficient, there is an
ample check by the Dominion audit and
the North-west audit to insure the proper
expenditure of the money. In addition to
the memorial which has been presented to
the Government, and which has been supported ably by oral statements and arguments
by Mr. Haultain and Mr. Ross, the
Government have had the advantage of
having the claims of the North-west presented to it by the hon. member for Alberta
(Mr. Oliver) and other members of this
House who support the Government. There
is no danger, therefore, of these claims
being lost sight of. Whether any legislation on the subject can be carried through
this session or not will depend largely, I
suppose, on the length of. the session. We
have to carry our Estimates and our tariff, which will occupy a great deal of time:
and if hon. gentlemen find it desirable to
shorten the session so as to enable prominent members on both sides to attend
the Queen's Jubilee, it may be that we shall
not be able to carry through many measures
that we would like to bring down. I am
not able to give the hon. gentleman any
definite assurance at the present moment,
because the matter is being and has for
some time past been carefully considered
by a committee of the Government here;
but the papers he asks for will be brought
down as early as may be, and I shall be
glad to have them thoroughly discussed in this House, because I
recognize the importance of the question.
The hon. gentleman will remember that an
autonomy almost equal to provincial autonomy has already been conceded to the
North-west territories. With the exception, Â
I think, of the power to legislate on railways and one other item given to the provinces
under section 92 of the British North
America Act, we have conceded to them
every power which a province now possesses. But they do desire some change with
reference to the executive powers which
have been conferred upon them, and there
is no doubt that the process of legislative
evolution is going on there, a constitutional
evolution which this House will, at the
proper time, I have no doubt, recognize by
granting the fullest statutory powers to enable it to be brought to a successful completion.
With regard to the matter in point, the
subsidy which was voted by this House to
the Northwest Territories, that is also being considered in great detail by the Government.
The custom heretofore which has
prevailed. and which has been objected to
by gentlemen from the North-west, was this.
The North-west executive presented in detail their claim for a subsidy. but an arbitrary
sum frequently was deducted from
the amount of that claim. and they then
had, out of the smaller sum granted, to rearrange and appropriate amounts for the
specific purposes as they best could. An
improvement, I hope, will be obtained in
this regard. and while we must and will
recognize fully the claims of the North-west
to generous treatment, we must also recognize that there are limits to which that
treatment can extend. The whole subject is
now, and has been for weeks past, receiving consideration at the hands of a committee
of the Government.
Mr. CASEY. The hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Davin) has for a long time been
a perennial spring of joy and amusement to
this House. His humour has always borne
that peculiar stamp which distinguishes the
humour of Irishmen from that of even the
most talented men of all other countries,
and perhaps the most remarkable instance
of this is the fact that the hon. gentleman poses constantly as the representative
of the North-west Territories. When we remember that at present his majority, as representing
one of these great North-west
Territories constituencies, is a unit, and that
the unit which returned him to Parliament
was the vote of a partisan returning officer,
we must recognize that his claim is a very
Irish one indeed to represent the North-west
Territories. Still, we have enjoyed for many
years his attempt to be a westerner. He
has been wild enough perhaps. but he can
hardly be classed as western or as woolly,
and in attempting to represent the wild and
woolly west he has only afforded amusement to the House. This was all very well
while his friends were in power. because at
that time the coruscations of his humour
 were under some restraint. but now, since,
unfortunately for him, he is sitting on the
wrong side of the House, those corusca
1051
[COMMONS] 1052
tions are almost too frequent to be either
dazzling or amusing.
Mr. CASEY. They are pleasant in themselves, but like honey or some other things
we could name, too much of them is not as
pleasant as a mere taste once in a while.
He assures the House to-day that he has
never been bitten with a sentiment, to use
his own peculiar Hibernian way of putting
it, of a certain kind. and he has made reference to insects. New. insects bite sometimes.
as well as sentiments, and I am not
at all sure that my hon. friend has not
been bitten with a certain kind of insect
called the gadfly, which is known to drive
those it bites into great disorder of mind
and conduct. I should certainly judge from
his reply to the hon. member for Alberta
(Mr. Oliver) that something must have bitten him, if not a sentiment, then a gadfly.
Mr. DAVIN. I rise to a point of order. I
understand your ruling. Mr. Speaker, is that
no hon. gentleman should use insect illustrations. My hon. friend is transgressing
that ruling by implying that the hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver) is a gadfly,
and, in the character of a gadfly, hit me.
I do not care a pin about it, Mr. Speaker,
but your ruling must be respected.
Mr. SPEAKER. If the hon. gentleman
will say that the statement of the hon. member for Elgin (Mr. Casey) is offensive
to
him, I shall consider his point.
Mr. DAVIN. It is not in the least offensive to me. At that distance my hon.
friend, or any other insect, would not annoy
me.
Mr. CASEY. My hon. friend's interruption is rather clever. He wanted to draw
in the hon. member for Alberta again, but
I wish to assure him that there are no flies
on the hon. member for Alberta, neither
gadflies nor any other kind, and that the
gadfly which appears to have been biting
my hon. friend must have been one of his
own imagination. It must have been an
insect spirit, in other words, which must
have bitten him. I hope the hon. gentleman
will obtain a supply of insect powder and
get done with this gadfly, and the rest of
us will have peace to attend to serious matters of discussion.
Motion agreed to.
Cet individu a participé aux :
