1139
[...] Bertrand. Bowell, Bown, Brousseau, Brown,
Burton, Caldwell, Cameron (Huron), Campbell, Carling, Caron, Cartier (Sir G.-E.),
Casault, Cayley, Chauveau, Cimon, Colby,
Daoust, Dobbie, Drew, Dufresne, Dunkin, Ferguson, Ferris, Forbes, Fortin, Gaucher,
Gaudet,
Gendron, Gibbs, Grover, Hincks (Sir F.),
Holmes, Howe, Huot, Hurdon, Irvine, Jackson,
Keeler, Lacerte, Langevin, Langlois, Lawson,
Macdonald (Sir J. A.), McDonald (Lunenburg), McDonald (Middlesex West), Masson
(Soulanges), Masson (Terrebonne), McConkey, McDougall (Trois-RiviĂšres), McGreevy,
McKeagney, McMillan, Merritt, Morris, Morrison (Niagara), O'Connor, Perry, Pinsonneault,
Pope, Pouliot, Read, Renaud, Robitaille, Ross
(Champlain),'Ryan (King's, N.B.), Scriver,
Simpson, Sproat, Stephenson, Sylvain, Tilley,
Wallace, Walsh, Webb, Willson, Workman, and
Wright (Ottawa County)â85.
On item $800, for observatory in New
Brunswick,
After a short discussion, the amendment was
lost on a division.
On item $700, for returns of births, marriages, and deaths in Quebec Province,
Hon. Mr. Dunkin moved that the item be
struck out, the expenditure being provided by
Statute.
The item was struck out accordingly.
On item $1,300,000, for opening communication with, establishing a government in,
and
providing for the Settlement in the North-West
(re-vote),
Mr. Masson (Soulanges) moved that the
words be added "providing that no portion of
the said Loan or of the Dominion Funds shall
be expended in supplying troops or militia of
the Dominion for the purpose of acquiring by
force of arms possession of the said Territory".
Hon. Sir George-Ă. Cartier said that the
Government must come down with a measure
to provide for the North-West. With regard to
the Government of that Territory, the measure
which was passed last session expired at the
end of the present session; and next week there
would be a measure introduced by the Government, and then would be the time to raise
this
question.
Mr. Masson understood that the policy of
the Government was to send a large army to
take possession of that Territory. They were
1140 COMMONS DEBATES April 21, 1870
told last year that the Territory was to cost
ÂŁ300,000, but he found that the Government
had sent out orders through the militia with a
view to take possession of this Territory.
Hon. Sir George-Ă. Cartier said that the
item did not at all go for military purposes, it
was merely for opening communication. The
Red River question was too large to come up at
the present time.
Mr. Masson said if no part of the sum was to
be employed for military purposes there could
be no objection to accepting his amendment.
The intention of the Government was to send a
military force. He had twice offered his services against the Fenians, but he could
not
permit the Government to go and raise an
army to take possession of a country with
which they had nothing to do. The people of
the North-West ought to be put on the same
terms as the people of Newfoundland or Prince
Edward's Island. They had no idea of compelling those Provinces to enter the Union
by force
of arms; and a different rule ought not to be
followed in the case of the North-West. If they
sent a soldier to that Territory there would be
a war of Catholics and Protestants. (No, no.)
There would be a war between nation and
nation, and race and race. (No, no.) And the
first shot that would be fired there would lose
us the Territory. (No.) He was well convinced
of that. He spoke from conviction, and a sense
of duty he owed to his constituency. He
thought that a peaceful policy would settle all
difficulties with less expense and greater satisfaction to the country.
Mr. Masson said that a war there would end
in a war with the United States. That was his
opinion, but he might be mistaken. It would be
satisfactory to no part of the country, for he
did not believe that there would be a single
man that would offer to go and take possession
of a country where they had no position at all.
No, it was for the Imperial Government to give
them peaceful possession of that territory, and
when they had it in peaceful possession he was
willing, old as he was, to go and defend it.
Hon. Sir John A. Macdonald said that it
was quite clear that the resolution went much
further than Mr. Masson had gone in his
speech. He stated that if this vote did not go for
any military expenditure he would have no
objection to its passing, but it went much further, for it related to the general
revenue of the
Dominion. The hon. gentleman's speech and
resolutions did not agreeâhis motion meant
one thing and his words another. It was too
1141
important a question to be brought up on a side
issue, and it could not be brought up on a side
issue. The resolution could not be discussed at
this late hour of the night. The hon. gentleman
had refused to withdraw his resolution,
although a pledge had been given by the Minister of Militia that full opportunity
would be
given to consider it; but the hon. member
would not take the word of the Minister of
Militia, and had tried to introduce an element
of strife; therefore he (Sir John A. Macdonald)
would move the adjournment of the debate on
that resolution.
Mr. Mackenzie said he did not intend to
combat the views of the Minister of Justice in
adjourning the debate, but he did ask the Government to adopt some bold and vigorous
policy that would commend itself to the country in that matter. They seemed to be
afraid
almost to speak on that matter, or act with
independence. He was painfully impressed
with the disagreeable feeling he felt surrounding him in connection with this matter,
and if
the Government did not bring the necessary
information before the House he intended to
call the attention of the House to the position
Government occupied. While he was entirely
unwilling to embarrass the Government in a
position which was one of considerable difficulty, still he asked that, before the
debate
came on, they make up their minds to bring
down a policy that would be satisfactory to the
House and the country. The gentleman who
moved that resolution said if anything more
was done in the way of sending troops or restoring order by force, as order must always
be
restored, where there had been a violation of
the law, and more than that the taking away of
human life; the gentleman had said if this were
done it would give dissatisfaction to the whole
country. That was not correct. If there was a
failure of justice, a failure of vindicate the
majesty of British law, the country as a whole
would hold the Government responsible for it.
Hon. Sir John A. Macdonald said the
remarks of the hon. member for Lambton
showed that he deprecated discussions as well
as the Government. The Government was quite
aware of the gravity of the occasion and it was
that sense of gravity which made the Government take every step with the greatest
care.
Before the resolution came up again the hon.
member for Lambton would find a policy disclosed by the Government, which would meet
not only the views of the majority of that
House, but of those members who usually
accorded their support to the present Government.
1144 COMMONS DEBATES April 21, 1870
The House then concurred in several further
items.
PROGRESS OF BUSINESS
Hon. Sir John A. Macdonald moved that
when the House rose on Friday it should
adjourn till half past 7 on Saturday. Government orders to have precedence.
BANK OF UPPER CANADA
In reply to Mr. Mackenzie
Hon. Sir Francis Hincks said he had given
notice of a Bill intituled: "An Act to vest in Her
Majesty for the purposes therein mentioned,
the property and powers now vested in the
trustees of the Bank of Upper Canada".
NORTH-WEST DELEGATES
Hon. Sir John A. Macdonald said that
several reports in connection with the delegates to the North-West would be presented
to-morrow.
The House adjourned at 2 a.m.
Cet individu a participé aux :
