BRITISH COLUMBIA
Mr. JONES (Halifax) resumed the debate on the Bill to admit
British Columbia into the Dominion. He moved that the following
words be inserted after the word "purpose" in the amendment:
"The proposed engagements respecting the said Pacific Railway
would, in the opinion of this House, press too heavily on the
resources of the Dominion." He argued that the Government might
well hesitate to enter into such engagements after the fears and
doubts expressed by the hon. member for Sherbrooke and other
fathers of the Confederation. But, the Government would do well to
hesitate if they desired to consummate the Union. There were other
colonies to be added to the Dominion. Newfoundland and Prince
Edward Island had yet to be brought in and it was not likely that
they could be induced to join the Confederation under less
advantageous terms than were now offered to the Pacific Colony.
Hon. members opposite argued that if the Dominion was not
immediately extended to the Pacific, the Western colony would be
absorbed into the American Union, but the hon. members were
adopting the very measures which would promote that movement.
The strongest argument against annexation had always been that
our taxes were light, that while the Americans had a debt amounting
to $60 per head, ours was not quite $27 per head of our population.
Let these engagements be entered into by the Dominion, which
were now before the House, and the result would be to leave us
with a heavier debt in proportion to our resources than at present
weigh down the American Union.
The cause of our prosperity hitherto had been the contrast
between the United States and the Dominion, but the Government
proposed to reverse the present position of the two countries. While
the Americans were paying off their debt and reducing their taxes,
Canada was about to incur liabilities too great for her to bear. He
referred to the immense charge which the construction of the
Pacific Railway would bring on the country. He asked the House to
take a business view of this engagement, and ask themselves should
the Dominion undertake it. (Hear, hear.) This extravagant proposal
was the natural sequence of the Finance Minister's budget speech in
which that hon. member had spoken of the advantages of a great
national debt, and quoted from Macaulay in support of this view.
Hon. Sir FRANCIS HINCKS said he had not advocated the
creation of a national debt, nor had he quoted from Macaulay in
support of such a view. He had merely quoted the passage referred
to, to show how the great resources of England had enabled her to
surmount the difficulties of a great national debt.
Mr. JONES (Halifax): Then why refer to it at all. If the Hon.
Finance Minister had no intention to foreshadow the creation of a
great debt, why quote the passage? There was no doubt that the hon.
gentleman had that end in view, and the House should unite in
opposing such a suicidal policy.
Mr. BODWELL in seconding the amendment of the hon.
member for Halifax, spoke at considerable length against incurring
the heavy liabilities which the construction of a Pacific railway
would cause. He denied that there was any danger that British
Columbia would be annexed to the United States if it were not
brought into the Confederation. Did hon. members opposite
suppose that Great Britain would allow the republic to absorb any
portion of Her Majesty's possessions without a struggle? If the
cause was so weak that the government was obliged to resort to
such an argument in order to coerce their followers into voting for
this measure, it would be better to drop it altogether. He quoted
from the speech of the hon. member for Brome in the report of the
Confederation debate to show how some of the advocates of this
measure had once been most bitterly opposed to Confederation.
Hon. Mr. MORRIS said it was most surprising, in looking back
on the past history of Canada, to see what great tasks had been
accomplished. The government had been taunted time after time
with not being sincere in the great work of building up a British
power on the Continent, but they could turn to their record, and
challenge their opponents on the other side of the House, by what
they had really done. Was it nothing that the Dominion already
stretched from the Atlantic to the Rocky Mountains! And now the
question was whether they should or whether they should not make
what had once been considered a dream a living reality, by doing
their utmost to weld the provinces from one ocean to the other into
one solid Dominion. He was surprised at the course taken by some
hon. gentlemen in the present debate, and especially at that taken by
the hon. member for Sherbrooke, who had formerly taken the
deepest interest in the question, and had spoken most earnestly in
favour of the union now proposed; and he was more than surprised
at the course of the hon. member for Lambton, who, though a later
convert to the benefits of Confederation, had, with his party, stated
that he should set himself to assist to establish and consummate the
work.
But now, after speaking so often of his zeal for union, placed on
record a motion which, while admitting the Pacific Railway to be an
"urgent political necessity," attempted to prevent the House from
entering on the discussion of, and adopting the proposed terms of
union. The member for Sherbrooke had dealt with the matter on a
broader basis than had more recently been introduced into the
debate, and, while admitting that he had no quarrel with the amount
of subsidy to be granted to British Columbia, stated that he would
March 30, 1871 COMMONS DEBATES
299
have preferred the terms originally proposed by British Columbia to
those now proposed by the Government. He was sure, however, that
that preference would not be shared by the House or the country.
The original terms had provided the building of a coach road within
three years of union, and that the railway also should be built as
early as possible, with a specified expenditure of a million a year.
The member for Lambton stated that he had never contemplated
anything more than a road from Lake Superior, but of what benefit
would such a road as that be.
He also told the House that he was opposed to locking up the
lands of the country by handing them over to a company, but he
(Hon. Mr. Morris) maintained that the course being pursued by that
hon. gentleman would lock up the lands for ever. How could the
lands be available for settlement and cultivation unless facility of
access was provided? The Illinois road, which had been used by the
hon. gentleman as an illustration of the danger of locking up lands
by handing them over to a company, was a proof that the very
reverse was the case, for the results of that road were that Illinois
was peopled rapidly, and the lands, instead of being locked up, were
almost entirely disposed of, for out of a grant of two and a half
millions of acres, only half a million remained in the hands of the
company. He asked the House seriously the nature and character of
the land proposed to be acquired. That land consisted of the United
Province of British Columbia and Vancouver's Island, and no one,
who understood the matter, could deny that the addition of that
province would increase enormously the wealth, the resources, and
the prosperity of the Dominion. He had several extracts from works
on the country, showing its valuable nature and character, and
thought the member for Lambton was not justified in the remarks
he had used to the effect of there being scarcely any arable land in
the whole of British Columbia.
Mr. MACKENZIE stated that what he had said was that after
descending the slopes of the Rocky Mountains, the country was the
roughest on the continent.
Hon. Mr. MORRIS thought the construction he had put on the
hon. member's remarks was not very far wrong, but he could state
on the undisputable authority of Mr. Trutch, the Surveyor General
of British Columbia, that taking the whole of British Columbia and
Vancouver Island fully one-third, or about 50,000,000 of acres was
good farming land, while the whole acreage of Ontario was
77,000,000 acres. It appeared to him that throughout the whole
debate a strange fallacy had existed. The Railway had been spoken
of as a mere bargain to induce British Columbia to enter the Union,
whereas that work was of more importance to Canada than it was to
British Columbia, for, having already acquired the great North West
they were compelled by force of circumstances to go forward and
render it a valuable acquisition, and he was convinced that if the
House turned its back on British Columbia by adopting the
amendment of the member for Lambton, it would do a grievous
injury to the cause of Confederation which might prove irreparable.
The present position of Canada was analogous to that of the States
some years ago, when that country, recognizing the importance and
necessity of communication from one side of its territory to the
other, both as a bond of union between the people of the east and
west, and as a means of securing the vast trade between Europe and
Asia, had taken steps which in a short time would result in three
different lines from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and the reasons that
had urged America should be equally powerful with Canada, and he
believed the Canadian line could be constructed in a satisfactory
manner, by means of the proposed land grand without in the least
degree overburdening the people.
The House in the course of the debate had rung with cries that a
debt of a $100 million was being incurred, but the speakers knew
well that by means of the land, the line could be constructed
without any approach to a burden that the people could not bear,
and no Ministry would ever dare to propose to incur such a debt as
had been spoken of in this case. The Northern Pacific was being
constructed on a land grand only, and could it be doubted therefore,
that Canada, with better lands and fewer difficulties, would be able
to devise such a scheme as would attract foreign capital, as the
Americans had done. The House must be aware that before a dollar
could be expended or an acre of land granted, a scheme would have
to be submitted to and endorsed by the House, and therefore the
whole matter would be within the control of Parliament. The
question was whether or not British Columbia should be invited to
join the Union, and whether or not the railway should be
constructed, and he believed that when the Union should be
accomplished and representatives from British Columbia should sit
in that House, there would be no doubt of the railway being
proceeded with as rapidly as the resources of the country would
admit. He had every confidence not only that the House would
endorse the proposition of the Government, but that it would be
approved by the people of the country also, and it would be a bright
day for the Dominion when the first sod was cut on the Canadian
Pacific Railway, and in time to come many of his friends opposite,
who were really desirous of consummating Confederation, though
they might now oppose this scheme, would rejoice that the
Government had not been deterred from following out the work, but
had persevered in their determination to carry forward the work of
union with the Pacific colonies.
Hon. Sir A.T. GALT would not again have spoken but for the
allusions made to him, but under the circumstances he felt bound to
express his views on the important question before the House.
Referring to the remarks of the Minister of Inland Revenue he
(Hon. Sir A.T. Galt) considered that the course he was pursuing
would tend much more to build up Confederation on a sound basis
than that pursued by the government, and that a policy of prudence
and foresight was more necessary for the future progress of the
Dominion than the unwise incurring of obligations now proposed
could possibly be. They should not lose sight of the real interests of
the country in rushing forward in the path, which, though all might
desire to follow it ultimately, if too hastily followed would defeat
the very object desired to be obtained.
As to the coach road proposed by British Columbia, involving a
useless expenditure of money, he maintained that the necessities of
the railway would require the construction of such a road so that it
300 COMMONS DEBATES
March 30, 1871
would have to be made in any case. As to the railway, the people of
British Columbia had only asked for an expenditure of a million
yearly, and even if that were continued in perpetuity it could not
represent more than twenty millions. Those people had never
presumed to demand that the line should be completed within a
given time, and the proof that they had not done so had been shown
by the Minister of Inland Revenue himself, who had argued that it
was Canada that wanted the railway and not British Columbia.
Hon. Mr. MORRIS stated that what he had said was that,
throughout the discussion, the matter of the railway had been
deliberately treated as if the whole benefits were to accrue to British
Columbia, whereas Canada also had an equal interest in the work.
Hon. Sir A.T. GALT said he could not admit the statement that
if the Government's resolutions were carried, Parliament would still
retain the control of the matter. The details of the measure might
come before them, but the obligation would remain that the work
must be carried through
coûte que coûte. Five years ago, it had been
decided that the lntercolonial Railway could not be undertaken
without an Imperial guarantee; five years ago, the Province of
Canada had to take a portion of the circulation of the country to
meet her floating debt, two years ago, the Government had to
borrow $2,500,000 from the Bank of Montreal, to enable them to
say that the money borrowed for the lntercolonial was still within
their control, and only one year ago, the Finance Minister had to ask
an increase of 5% on all duties to provide against a possible
deficiency of revenue, but yet, when it now fortunately happened
that we had a surplus, it seemed to be believed that this state of
things must continue, and that it was safe to incur any amount of
obligation. He thought the people of British Columbia, if they really
desired union, would be quite satisfied that the Dominion would
construct a railway as rapidly as her resources would admit, and
would not ask for any more. He hoped and believed the House
would confirm the amendment of the member for Lambton.
lt being 6 o'clock, the House rose.
AFTER RECESS
Mr. OLIVER resumed the debate arguing that the pacific colony
should be admitted into the Union on the same terms as the other
provinces. He denied that those who favoured the amendment were
opposed to the admission of British Columbia, or even to the
building of the Pacific railway. He favoured these schemes, but
thought we should consider the effect of such a very large
expenditure at the present time. He considered that to allow six
gentlemen from British Columbia to take their seats as representing
only 100,000 people, was unfair to the other parts of the Dominion.
Another feature in the scheme was unfair. The debt of British
Columbia was taken at $1,666,620, which was assumed by the
Dominion. This amounted to $20 odd per head of the population,
whereas in Quebec and Ontario the amount per head of debt
assumed by the Dominion and subsidies was only $2.07. lt had
been proposed that thirteen million of acres of lands running
alongside the railway should be appropriated. If so, these lands
would be a constant cause of expenditure for management and
surveying. (
Hear, hear.) lt would be better that these lands should
remain in the lands of the Local Government of British Columbia;
otherwise they might pass into the hands of land speculators, a state
of things which would prove ruinous to the settlement of the
country. If these lands were not locked up, they would be sufficient
to support a population of two millions, and it would be better that a
money bonus should be given and these lands opened up to the
people for settlement. (
Hear, hear.) He believed that the railway
should be prosecuted with energy, and all the money that could be
spared spent upon it. That was the proposition contained in the
amendment before the House. It was the duty of the Finance
Minister in introducing this scheme, which pledged the country to
complete the road in ten years, to tell the House where the money to
build it was to come from. He calculated that our present debt, and
obligations already or soon to be incurred, would amount to
$127,000,000, and if to this were added $100,000,000 for the
Pacific Railway, the amount would be $227,000,000; the interest
per annum would be $11,350,000. He for one was not prepared to
go that length. To do so would injure the present and future
prospects of the Confederation. He would support the amendment.
Mr. MAGILL was in favour of bringing all British North
America into the Union, but on terms equitable and fair to all the
provinces. The terms proposed by the Government were not of that
nature, and if the measure were carried, it would have the effect of
driving immigration from our shores. It was proposed to sap the
very foundations of the constitution which had been framed with
such care and at such a cost. It was too much to expect this colony
with its 13,000 of a population to override our constitution and
create dissensions in this Dominion with its four millions of people.
He protested against the position in which the Government had
placed the House by bringing down this measure, framed by
themselves, without having had the opinion of this House or of the
people of this Dominion on the subject, and say that it should not be
altered in any degree. It was unfair and he, for one, should record
his vote against it. (
Hear, hear.)
Mr. COLBY believed that the hon. member for Lambton
expressed the opinion of the whole country when he said that it was
desirable to bring British Columbia into the Union, that it was
expedient to prosecute the construction of the Pacific Railway and
to commence and push it through as soon as the financial condition
of the country would permit it. That was exactly the policy
announced by the Government. They brought down no cast-iron
treaty. No one supposed that if they failed to complete the railway
within the 10 years they would be guilty of a breach of faith. They
proposed to do their best to complete it within that period. All the
opposition which had been offered to this measure now before the
House, had been presented in exactly the same manner as the
opponents to Confederation had fought against the Union in the
past. He would not be surprised if the people of British Columbia
should fail to obtain this union with Canada, if they looked to the
United States for the introduction of capital to open up their
country.
March 30, 1871 COMMONS DEBATES
301
Hon. Mr. ANGLIN said this was a matter of too great
importance to be made a party question. He hoped every
member would look upon it in a purely practical light, and
oppose it as a utopian measure brought in by the visionaries who
were hurrying the country to ruin. Looking at the measure on its
merits there was something objectionable in every one of the
clauses. He disapproved of the unfair Parliamentary
representation, giving six members to 13,000 people; to
pensioning officers, and to the payment of $100,000 per annum
to sustain a corrupt and extravagant Government, given, too,
under the pretence that it was rent for public lands. Let the
House know all the meaning of these terms. The Government of
the Dominion were to undertake the construction and
completion, under any contingency, of a Pacific railway within
ten years after the date of the union. Why could not the
Government come forward honestly and friendly and tell the
truth, that they knew it would lay a heavy burden on the
Dominion to carry out this engagement? But no, each member
of the Government tried to make light of the difficulties to be
encountered in the construction of this road.
The Red River expedition, in their march to Fort Garry, had
given evidence as to the nature of the country between the head
of Lake Superior and Red River, and they had proved it to be of
the most sterile character. It was proved to be, for hundreds of
miles, a wilderness of rock, swamp and lake, quite
uninhabitable, and presenting the greatest difficulties to the
construction of a railway. At the Rocky Mountains, fresh
difficulties were to be met, and the British Colonist, a paper
published at Victoria, V.I., favourable to confederation, spoke
of the route through which it was proposed to run the railway, as
a "sea of mountains." If this account were correct, it would be
difficult to find those vast tracts of fertile country spoken of by
hon. members opposite, and it could be no easy matter to run a
railway through it. With this much known, this House should be
enabled to understand how much of a burden they were
expected to bear, before they were asked to vote for this
measure. He spoke of the resources of the United States as very
superior to those of Canada.
Hon. Mr. ANGLIN said that the proposed debt would take
away Canada's only advantage over the States, and the policy of
the Government was breaking down all barriers and would
ultimately tend to annexation. He condemned the proposed
expenditure as enormous, and pointed out how a proposition to
incur an amount in England equal, in proportion to her wealth,
would be received, and said it could not be supposed that the
amount could be paid without a greatly increased taxation. He
spoke of the present surplus revenue as very exceptional, and
spoke of the difficulties and deficiencies of former years, and
said that the Minister of Finance himself understood that in the
proposals now before the House, a debt of $100,000,000 was
incurred, under which the Dominion would stagger. In addition
to this amount for cost of construction there would be the
working expenses to add to the burden, and the result would be
as described the previous night by the member for Wentworth.
Where was the amount to be obtained? It could not be obtained,
and the obligation was only to be incurred because some few
thousands of people on the Pacific coast were discontented and
would otherwise seek annexation to the United States. The
Statement that the cost incurred would only amount to a million
and a quarter, could not be believed by a single member of the
House. They would pledge themselves to construct the line in
ten years, and who could say that the country would not have to
pay every dollar. A company had been spoken of, but where was
the company? How could any company raise seventy-five
millions of dollars on fifiy million acres of barren waste land,
and the Government only played with the House and imposed on
the credulity of their supporters in saying the work would be
done by a railway.
The question should be viewed calmly and dispassionately
and not as a party question, as the Minister of Militia had tried
to make it. The Minister of Customs had imagined a teeming
and prosperous population in British Columbia and the North
West, but were they to base their vote on baseless imaginings.
Where was this population to come from when it was well
known that the population of British Columbia had materially
decreased of late years! It could only be explained by the fact
that the country was not inviting to settlers. It was hard to
persuade settlers to come even to Ontario and the other parts of
the Dominion, and how could it be supposed that a larger
immigration could be directed to these new colonies. The House
had been told that it was bound to construct the railway to the
Rocky Mountains, but he would like to know how, when and
where that obligation was incur;—they were bound to do
nothing of the kind unless the finances of the country fully
justified it. It had also been stated that although they incurred
the obligation, they would not be compelled to carry it out
unless they chose.
Hon. Mr. MORRIS said he had stated that the House was not
to be led away, but was to remember that any scheme for
carrying out the work would have to be submitted to it, and that
it would control the whole matter, and those were the facts.
Hon. Mr. ANGLIN resumed that if the representative of
British Columbia honestly considered the interests of his people
he would repudiate the whole Government scheme. Let not the
members believe the statement of any Minister, but let them
read the words of the resolutions themselves, and judge what a
burden they involved, and he believed that if every duty and tax
was doubled the expenditure would not be met, but when the
debt and taxation was then increased, the way to annexation
would well be opened, and he stood there to do what he could to
save the country from the fate, and from the irresistable ruin that
would ensue from this scheme. He implored the House to ignore
party and think of the country.
302 COMMONS DEBATES
March 30, 1871
Hon. Sir FRANCIS HINCKS had been anxious before speaking
to hear the views of others. He had listened with great attention to
the gentleman who had preceded him, and there could only be one
opinion that the whole tone of his remarks showed opposition to the
acquisition to British Columbia, and opposition to the constructions
of a railway, and the coalition that had taken place on the opposite
side showed only opposition to the cause of union with the Pacific
colonies. He would ask members on both sides to consider the
position of the Government, and he assumed they were all in favour
of Confederation. He desired to call particular attention to the fact
that all proceedings were of the character of negotiations between
two parties, as to the best means of accomplishing an object on
which both were agreed. The Government entered into the
negotiations, and with one or two exceptions the whole House
seemed in favour of the Union with British Columbia and of the
construction of the railway.
He was surprised, however, to hear the member for Gloucester
cheered by the gentleman round him when speaking of ignoring the
whole population except the whites. The remainder of the
population contributed most largely to the revenue, and he could
speak from experience that the Chinese were an exceedingly
valuable class as a duty paying people. The objections of hon.
gentlemen had dwindled down entirely to the matter of the railroad.
The proposition made was that the railway was an absolute
necessity, and that Canada should use every exertion to construct it
at as early a date as possible. In the negotiations that took place, it
was found impossible that Canada could undertake to commence
this railway and make a stated payment annually, and it had never
been understood that the Government themselves should undertake
the work, but that it should be done by means of Companies with a
land grand and money grant. Every calculation had been based on
that understanding.
Hon. Sir FRANCIS HICKS said it was necessary to give
minute details, and he had already given a rough estimate based on
statements of the most eminent engineers. Hon. gentlemen had
admitted the necessity of the railway, but that had not been the tone
of the member for Gloucester. His views were widely different
from those of the representatives of Ontario. During the course of
the discussion, he could not help thinking of the important
proceedings at Washington, and thinking of those and of the
important negotiations with the delegates from British Columbia, he
was surprised at the cavilling on small matters which had taken
place. The member for Gloucester seemed entirely opposed to the
railway, but that was not the view of the member for Sherbrooke,
who was well known as a promoter of such a railway, and a
believer in its practicability. The Government scheme was a
modification of the propositions of British Columbia, and although
they would not undertake a stated annual expenditure, they fully
admitted the necessity of the construction of the railway.
Mr. SCATCHERD asked whether if the land would not build
the road, the road would not be built.
Hon. Sir FRANCIS HINCKS said no, he had already stated that
it was estimated that the Dominion would have to pay about a
million and a quarter a year, but it was well understood that if
insurmountable difficulties arose, the Government could not be
supposed to proceed to anything ruinous.
But it was necessary to satisfy British Columbia that Canada was
in earnest in going on with the work, and therefore a time was
specified. No one had answered the argument that the railway was
not entirely a bargain with British Columbia, for if that colony had
not consented to join the Union would not a railway to the Rocky
Mountains still have been a necessity. The negotiations had
necessarily to assume the shape of a Treaty, and in all such matters
concessions had to be made on both sides. The delegates
themselves had been of different opinions, and the result of the
conferences that had taken place was embodied in the resolutions
before the House, and no amendments could be made without
throwing open the whole question. These were questions on which
the people of British Columbia dissented from the terms now
settled, and any amendment would reopen the whole matter. The
matter must be dealt with and accepted or rejected as a whole.
Very many more forebodings had been expressed as to the
financial result of the propositions. The debt of Canada was about
$20 a head and that of America $60 a head, and yet they could
undertake three different lines of road, and he did not think Canada
need have any fear on the matter. As to the debt of $100,000,000
Government had no intention of incurring anything of the sort. Of
course the Government undertook the work in ten years, but if after
doing everything to carry out the engagement in good faith, it
should be found that untoward circumstances should prevent the
completion of the work, could it be supposed that Canada would be
required to proceed to her own serious disadvantage, even if the
work might be delayed for some years? He referred to the strictures
of the member for Wentworth as to the Municipalities Laws, and
shewed that the measure he had proposed had been most generally
supported, and yet he was charged individually with the whole
matter. All that had been done however, was to enable
municipalities to borrow money in their own discretion. He spoke
of what the member for Oxford South had said, as to his departure
from, and return to Canada, explaining the circumstances that had
led to his doing so, denying all charge of inconsistency. He then
continued, they had either to spurn or accept British Columbia, and
the result of the amendment, if carried, would be to do away with
all hope of bringing British Columbia into the Union.
Mr. WORKMAN deprecated any party feelings in the
discussion, the question being one of the utmost importance to the
future of the country. He regretted very much that he would have to
dissent from the Government scheme, which appeared calculated to
damage the country. He was friendly to the completion to
Confederation, notwithstanding. It was his opinion that this railroad
would involve Canada in an expenditure of at least fifty millions.
The cost of this work, the great difficulties natural and other in its
way were reasons for our carefully considering this scheme and its
consequences before rashly embarking in it. He ridiculed the
March 30, 1871 COMMONS DEBATES
303
spread-eagle anticipations and flourishes indulged in respecting this
railway, and particularly the notion that the trade of China and
Japan could be attracted over North America by this transcontinental road. Any merchant
or intelligent man knew that the
products of the East would be damaged by railway carriage, and
that the shipping presented the best means of transportation. It was
all nonsense to attribute to Confederation the credit for the present
prosperity of the country. As to the expectations connected with the
Intercolonial, he believed from reliable information that it would be
a source of expense, trouble and anxiety to us. But at any rate let us
see how it worked before entering upon another and longer railway.
It was bad enough to have one elephant on our shoulders without a
second. In the name of his constituents and of the trade and
commerce of the country he protested against this scheme, which
made him tremble for it; and it was because he thought it would be
ruinous to the Dominion that he would vote against these
resolutions.
Hon. Mr. McDOUGALL (Lanark North) said that although
the debate had extended over three days there were two or three
points to which no reference had yet been made, to which he felt it
his duty to draw attention. He believed that a very large majority of
the members of this House were desirous of seeing British
Columbia united to the Dominion. Some twenty years ago, when he
first entered into public life as a journalist, he had placed on his
political platform as one of its most prominent planks Union of the
British North American Provinces. In 1859 he was present at the
Reform Convention in Toronto when the political condition of the
country was discussed, and on that occasion he moved a resolution
which embodied the principle on which this great scheme was
founded. It received the assent of a majority of that assembly, and
ever since then he had been endeavouring to the best of his ability
to promote and advance this great measure.
Along with hon. members opposite, it had been his good fortune
to help push forward Confederation, and he now accused them of
having failed in the performance of their duty in the final
accomplishment of the work. He said so boldly, looking at it from
no political or party standpoint, and feeling no desire, as might be
the case with some hon. members of the Opposition, to see the
Government displaced from their seats at the present moment if
they would only do their duty. Taking an impartial view of the case,
he must charge them with having struck a fatal blow at the great
measure with which for the last few years they had been connected,
and for the success of which they were pledged to this House and
responsible to the country. They propose, in order to induce, as they
alleged, British Columbia to enter the Union, to load the Dominion
with a debt double that under which the country now suffered,
under which, at all events, it now labored. For the purpose of
accomplishing this Union, no such sacrifice, no such burden, no
such evil consequences were at all necessary. He failed to hear any
decent reason why this Government should, without the authority of
Parliament and without submitting the proposition in any form for
public discussion, spring it on the House as they had done. Under
the constitution, no such authority was delegated to the
Government. No authority was given them, of their own motion, to
enter into, and finally conclude, negotiations which, as the House
was told, must be accepted without qualification of amendment.
Hon. Mr. McDOUGALL (LanarkNorth) had expected to hear
this question asked, but he would tell the hon. member that this was
an entirely different case. The Quebec conference was a body of
gentlemen assembled together to discuss the propriety of passing
the law which regulated this very matter. The terms of that law
were publicly discussed in the press and in the various existing
legislative bodies of the several Provinces. It was agreed by them
and alterations were made in accordance with expressions of
opinion at the very last moment in England to meet the difficulties
developed by these discussions. These circumstances were
altogether different from those which surround the present case. In
the Union Act were the
ipsissima verba which show how the Union
of the other colonies is to be consummated. The Constitutional Act
points out the parties who are to negotiate. It declares that the
members of this House are one body, and the members of the other
House another body, who are to settle its terms.
Hon. Sir GEORGE-É. CARTIER said the proper way to bring
in the colony was through the Government of the day. It involved a
pecuniary expenditure, and could not emanate from any other
source.
Hon. Mr. McDOUGALL (Lanark North) said the proposition
which had been under debate for the last three days was not subject
to the ordinary rule. The Government had taken every precaution to
tell the House that this measure was in the nature of treaty, that not
one of its details could be altered, and that it must be accepted as it
was submitted to the House. Now, the meaning of the constitution
was very different. It was only after full consideration in this
Parliament that the measure should be accepted. Of what use was
this debate at all, if the measure must be adopted without
amendment? He would remind the House, that British Columbia
was a Crown colony, with a population principally of miners and
adventurers, and a very small number of permanent settlers. It was
so at the time of Confederation, possibly the population was larger
then. There was no popular representation at that time. This position
did not fail to strike the attention of the Conference. It was the
policy of the Imperial Government, and the four Provinces to
complete the Union and all British America as soon as possible. He
with others at the Conference had contended that it was the duty of
the Imperial Government to bring pressure to bear on its own
officers of British Columbia to submit to reasonable terms in order
to secure Union with Canada. The small number of the inhabitants
did not justify the admission of a colony on more favourable terms
than those offered to the older and more populous Atlantic
Provinces. The circumstances were entirely different and it was
absurd to say that the future destiny of that country was in the hands
of a few adventurers who were mining there. Since Confederation
was agreed upon, the Imperial Government has put it out to their
power to use that effective influence they might have used to secure
304 COMMONS DEBATES
March 30, 1871
proper terms and compel their acceptance by the Government and
people of that colony. He did not believe there was any desire on
the part of the majority of the people of British Columbia to make
demands unreasonable or impracticable. What right had they in
discussing terms with Canada to stipulate for construction of public
works not only inside their own territory, but in the North West
territories or in Ontario? He did not believe the people of that
Colony ever expected that privilege or would have insisted on this
railway on the present conditions. The railway would have three
sections, differing as to character of country, quality of the land and
other features. We know that no person would settle along the
Ontario end of the line stretching to a distance of a thousand miles
between the Ottawa valley and the Lake of the Woods, for it
presented no agricultural or trading advantages to attract settlers.
The middle sections consisted of good land, but had too sparse a
population to afford a business for a railway for many years to
come. Through and beyond the Rocky Mountains the country was
of a nature most difficult for a railway and most discouraging as
regards the prospects of settlement and traffic.
It was absurd and unreasonable then for us to rush into a vast
expenditure for a work of this kind without accurate knowledge of
the country, without surveys, without any means of enabling us to
form a reliable estimate as to its cost. Did the Government, then, in
the absence of any knowledge, that capitalists would undertake this
road, contemplate the construction of the line themselves? Or did
they really intend to delay the completion of the road if serious
difficulties arose, notwithstanding the pledge and promise now
offered British Columbia? If that was the intention of the
Government, why not say so frankly and honestly? All, he thought,
that should be promised or undertaken at present was the
construction of a telegraph and coach road, or at the utmost, of a
railway from Pembina to the Rocky Mountains. In a short time the
American road from the borders of Ontario to Pembina would be
completed, and be as accessible and serviceable to our people as to
themselves. Besides the Government of Canada would shortly
establish a mixed land and water communication from Lake
Superior to Fort Garry, which would provide all the facilities we
needed for the present, perhaps for years. He saw no difficulty,
whatever, in making use of the American road to reach Fort Garry
and the Rocky Mountains. By giving liberal land grants to a
company, and retaining alternate sections of land we might secure a
railway across the plains and promote the rapid settlement of the
fertile belt. Beyond that a good serviceable post road could be
opened to the Pacific coast, realizing all the people of that colony
some short time ago solicited, and accomplishing all the trade and
interest of the Dominion, generally, required.
He was as anxious as any man to see this Confederation
completed; but denied he was therefore bound to accept every
absurd, extravagant scheme proposed professedly with that object,
and not shown to be either necessary or practicable. Was he to be
blamed for hesitating to agree to every wild proposition of this
kind? If we assented to this proposition we should weigh down the
Dominion to a position which would not only excite dissatisfaction
among her own inhabitants, but destroy all confidence in our future
among the people of other nations.
With respect to the political arrangements he considered that the
representatives for so small a number of people was a violation of
the principles laid down in the Union Act, but the evil would be
cured in a few years if the matter was not of serious consequence.
The Manitoba measure had been passed under peculiar
circumstances and was no precedent to sanction the present
violation of the fundamental principles of the constitution, but, as
he had said, the evil would be temporary, and might be conceded to
British Columbia. The same might be said of the money grant,
which, though based on a larger population than really existed, did
not form a serious objection, for it had always been understood that
the small Provinces should be enabled to carry on their Government
and local works and he would be quite ready to vote directly a
sufficient sum to enable British Columbia to meet her expense.
While, however, the matter of the railway stood on its present basis
he had no hesitation in opposing the Government scheme, although
he yielded to no one in his desire to complete Confederation.
He was astonished that Government should have attempted to
impose the condition that no alteration should be made, for the Act
of Union gave to the two Houses of Parliament and to no other
body the right to make any amendment they might deem expedient,
and while the Legislative Council of British Columbia had
discussed every detail of the scheme, he contended that the same
right belonged to the people and Parliament of this Dominion.
Mr. BEATY had received no intimation from his constituents to
oppose the Government scheme, and he believed the general
impression in Ontario was that Confederation could not be
completed without British Columbia. He had every confidence in
the Ministry both in legislation for the present and future, and he
believed the interests of the country would be well cared for by
them. In the matter of Manitoba the people of Ontario had been
warned against the narrow minded Frenchmen, but he maintained
that for every liberty they possessed, civil and religious, they were
mainly indebted to the representatives of Lower Canada. If the
present scheme carried and the railway was constructed
successfully, as he believed it would be, the honour would belong
to the Minister of Militia and his noble band of reformers. The
matter had been fully discussed, and what was the policy—well, his
idea was that the policy was whether the gentlemen of the
Opposition should be allowed to sit on the Government benches.
That was their policy, and they did not care whether the North West
was developed or not. The Government now proposed, however, a
scheme of opening up the country and numbers of emigrants would
come in, instead of leaving for the States as at present, and before
many years elapsed, thousands of emigrants would be attracted if
the Government were allowed to carry out their plans of
development. He looked forward to a great future for Canada on
these grounds, and having every confidence in the resolutions he
should support them, and if he did otherwise, he would think he had
degraded himself.
March 30, 1871 COMMONS DEBATES
305
Hon. Mr. DORION said the question had two aspects, the
political and the financial; the latter, however, was much the most
important and had listened to the Government statements on that
head in hope of being able to vote for the resolutions, but the
minister of Finance had been able to give no favourable statement.
He took great care not to give any details, and beyond the assertion
that a cost of $100,000,000 would be practicable, they had heard
nothing. The American lines had been cited as examples, but it had
not been stated that in addition to the land grants an enormous
amount of money had also been granted. The Minister of Finance
ought to be able to state definitely the amount involved so that the
House might not have to make a blind vote, and he regretted the
humiliating proposal of the Minister of Inland Revenue, that after
the pledge had been given it might afterwards be retracted. He
spoke of the heavy obligations the Dominion already sustained, and
maintained that the Union Act provided that the canal system ought
to have been completed before any other responsibilities were
incurred.
Hon. Mr. TILLEY read the resolution at Quebec to show that
the North West question was to be an express object of
Confederation.
Hon. Mr. DORION said that matter had already been attained.
He had never had, and had not now, any faith in Confederation, but
he had felt in duty bound not to oppose it, but if he were most
anxious for the downfall of Confederation, he could desire for
nothing more than the present scheme to attain that object.
Reverting to the canal improvement, he considered it unjust that the
credit of the country should be pledged to this immense extent
before that canal improvement was completed. He quoted from a
report of Mr. Fleming, characterising the Pacific Railway as a
commercial absurdity and that the maintenance of such a line would
cost eight millions annually, and in fact that it was altogether
impraticable, and stating that a macadamized road to the Rocky
Mountains would require seventeen years for construction, and yet
hon. gentlemen opposite presumed to say that this gigantic work
could be commenced and completed within ten years. What greater
absurdity could be uttered in any intelligent Assembly? If
Confederation must be had in some direction better have it with the
150,000 of Newfoundland and the 100,000 of Prince Edward's
Island than with the 10,000 of British Columbia, while the
inhabitants in one case were settled, and in the other mere roving
adventurers. He did not admit the necessity of a Canadian Pacific
line, but thought the American lines should be used, and expend the
money rather in opening up the North West by roads. He thought
the four millions of people inhabiting the basin of the St. Lawrence
were entitled to greater consideration than the small population of
British Columbia, and if this large expenditure were to be incurred
rather let it be used in enlarging the canals and so securing the great
trade of the West.
The members were called in at one o'clock and the amendment
of Mr. Jones, of Halifax, was put with the following result: Yeas,
63; Nays, 98.
Mr. ROSS (Dundas) had ever been desirous of uniting the
Provinces into one compact body, but the scheme was not
perfected, and he thought the amendment he was about to move
would open the way for a better settlement than that proposed in the
resolutions before the House. He felt the country did not properly
understand the question and thought every one should be able to
communicate with his constituents. He proposed in amendment
that in the opinion of this House the further consideration of the
question be postponed for the present session of Parliament in order
that greater and more careful consideration may be given to a
question of such magnitude and importance to the people of this
Dominion.
The vote on this amendment was as follows: Yeas, 75; Nays, 85.
Mr. MACKENZIE'S amendment was put with the following
result: Yeas, 67; Nays, 94.
On the main motion being put,
Hon. Mr. DORION moved in amendment that the speaker do
not now leave the chair, but that it be resolved that, in view of the
engagements already entered into since the Confederation and the
large expenditure urgently required for canal and railway purposes
within the Dominion, this House would not be justified in imposing
on the people of this Dominion the enormous burden required to
build within ten years a railway to the Pacific as proposed by the
resolution submitted to this House. The amendment was lost on the
following division: Yeas, 70; Nays, 91.
The main motion was again put.
Mr. MACKENZIE gave notice that he would move other
amendments in Committee.
Hon. Mr. ANGLIN said the Government had not had a clear
majority of the total number of the House.
The main motion was carried and the House went into
Committee on the resolutions. Mr. COLBY in the Chair. The
resolutions passed through Committee and the Committee rose.
The House adjourned at 2 o'clock a.m.
Cet individu a participé aux :
