I will now read the extract from a
speech delivered by Mr. Cartier, Attorney
General of Lower Canada, now in London
as one of the delegates who have gone
home from that Province. He says :-
This is a credit to Lower Canada to
have such a gentleman among them,
who
could express such noble sentiments, and
so strongly attest to the loyalty of
the
French Canadian. The hon. President
of the Council spoke of the difficulties in
Canada with regard to the difference of
race and creed. There is no doubt but
there were and are difficulties ; but is it
any disparagement to this cause that men
are found who, seeing these difficulties,
have determined to rise above them, and
place these Colonies in such a position
that they cannot occur again? The hon.
member for St. John, (Mr. Anglin) said
that this Government could in two hours
pass a Bill calling on the Governor General to call out every man capable of
bearing arms in time of trouble ; yet,
when the Militia Bill was being discussed,
he took a very different ground. I believe
that when the people of this Province
awake to a sense of their true interest,
and have an opportunity to express their
feelings on this subject, a change will
then be made apparant. Our securities
now have fallen
in the English market,
and we hardly dare to put out any more
lest they should fall still lower in value ;
but I am of opinion that under Confederation we should have been able
to have
got what money we required on the most
advantageous
terms, and that is something that cannot be done by any delegation this Government
may now send
Home. We are told by the hon. President of the Council of the disadvantages
the opponents of Confederation labored
under at the late elections by the late
Government having the power to offer
certain vacant offices to those who would
support their Scheme ; but he did not tell
us that the leader of the Opposition had
still greater power to influence voters and
candidates than the then existing Government. I heard it said that the holders
of office under the late Government were
to be turned out all over the country. It
was known that the hon. President of the
Council would be the leader of the Government, if Confederation was not upheld,
and it was reported that those who announced themselves as opponents to the
Scheme would have a chance of filling
these offices. Such being the case,—
My object in making use of these
figures is to lay a fair statement before
the country, and I believe in
reviewing
these figures it shows that if we connect
ourselves with Canada, we go with
a
country that has resources that
we have
not. We are curtailed,
circumscribed
and fenced round. We are told that
our
market is the United States; that argument is put forth in favor of
Western
Extension. Of course it is very desirable that we should be able to buy in the
cheapest market and sell in the dearest,
but this is not all. We should look at the
position to which we should arrive under
a Union with Canada that we cannot attain without it. These are some of my
ideas on Confederation and why
we should
not send a delegation to England to tell
the people what they already know.
Very great stress has been laid on the 14th
Section of the Resolutions
adopted by
the delegates at Quebec, and although it
has been said in this connection that no
movement dare to be made towards the
carrying out of the Scheme in Nova Scotia ; yet I have no doubt that
the
whole
proposition will be laid before that people
and they be allowed to express an opinion
upon it. The 14th Section reads thus ;
"The first selection of the members of
the Legislative Council, shall be made,
except as regards Prince Edward Island.
from the Legislative Council of the various Provinces, so far as a
sufficient number be found qualified and willing
to
serve ; such members shall be
appointed
by the Crown at the recommendation
of the General Executive Government,
upon the nomination of the
respective local Governments, and in such
nomination due regard shall be had
to the claims of the members of the
Legislative Council of the opposition in
each Province, so that all political parties
may, as nearly as possible, be fairly represented." In fixing the appointment of
the Legislative Council thus,
and in making
them permanent, the delegates had
the
best interests of the Colonies before
them. I look upon this as a safeguard
against any encroachments that might be
made. I would not go into Confederation
unless the building of the
Intercolonial
Railway was guaranteed and prosecuted,
and what an advantage it would be to this
country to have $16,000,000 laid
out on
this work ; the majority of which
would
be spent here. A few days ago the Militia Bill passed, and we granted $30,000
to form a Camp of Instruction, and now
in such great has'e are we to show our
loyalty that I find an announcement in
the Royal Gazette calls the Militia out in
July, when the whole country will be in
the midst of haying, withdrawing
the labor from farms and increasing the
rates
of wages, and injuring other
Agricultural
products. Perhaps this is done that the
delegates, who I suppose are also
to be
sent in like haste, may convey to the English people a report of what we
are doing
to show our loyalty. The Hon.
President
of the Council brought in a
Resolution
with regard to a Maritime Union, but
there was no debate upon it. I
think
that subject should have been thoroughly
discussed, so that it might have some
weight on the delegates who are now to
be sent home, and that it might be explained for the benefit of the country ;
but that did not suit their purpose. But
why need the Government come down to
this House to ask us to appoint delegates?
Why not appoint them themselves? they
have the power. I want to know if, when
delegations have been appointed before,
the Government has pursued such a
course? When Messrs. Howe, Tilley,
and others, went to Canada, did
the Government then bring down a measure to
relieve them of all responsibility in the
matter? And the same will apply to our
Railway delegates, the President of the
Council being then a member of
the Government. Oh, but things have
changed
now. Yes, a change has taken place, but
one I think that does not add to the
dignity if the Executive. They are
expected to initiate measures and being
them before this House for an expression
of an opinion, but now they strive
to get
the opinion of the House without commiting themselves to any measures, as is evident
by these Resolutions, and
by
those
that are to be brought in by the hon.
member for St. John (Mr.Cudlip) with
regard to Western Extension. The hon.
President of the Council says
the delegates to the Quebec Conference
had no
authority to meet. I say they
had.
Mr. CONNELL.—The
delegates who are
now to be appointed will have
no authority from the people either. The
matter of
Confederation was brought before
the
people, and the decision for the present
is adverse to it.
Hon. Mr. SMITH.—They
were invited
by the Governor General to meet
but
they bound
themselves to the provisions
of
the Scheme.
Mr. CONNELL —Yes,
they bound themselves ; they did not shrink from the responsibility, and what is the
result ? They
have gone out and others have taken their
places. The hon. President of the Council, and the hon. Chief Commissioner of
the Board of Works differ on the question
of authority
and I take sides with the
Board of Works on that point. That
hon. gentleman made up his mind
that he
would not hold office unless it was submitted to the people. This was
done, and
the Government suffered by it. The hon.
Chief Commissioner took grounds against
the Scheme as early as the first
of November ; but he does not tell us what took
place between that time and the 19th
January, when he resigned his
office. He
does not say why he did not resign before, although I believe he acted conscientiously
in the matter. It is
not a matter of any great importance, however. He complains that a despatch was received
in 1364 that he did not
see till a
long time after, although he was
a member of the Government. He was busy,
no doubt, about his office duties
when it
was received, and it was known that he
was not opposed to any action with regard
to Railways ; but I will not go into this,
as the hon. member opposite (Mr. McMillan) will doubtless take it up and explain it
satisfactorily. Some
observations
have been made by the hon. member from
Victoria, (Mr. Costigan) and
the hon.
member from the County of St. John,
(Hon. Mr. Anglin), with regard
to the
hardware and stoves in Canada. It is
well known that the iron of this Province
is not fit for the manufacture of hollowware and stoves ; but that of Canada, from
the Marmora Mines, is just suited for that
purpose. But this fact is no argument at
all, as those who know anything about the
subject, are aware that the iron for farm
implements, and most other
purposes, is
now imported from Scotland at considerable
cost, whilst in Canada the iron
for
hollow-ware is found on their own soil
and manufactured. In this respect, therefore, they have the advantage of
us. But
it is no argument
against Confederation
that we have to import iron. The hon.
member for St. John, (Mr. Anglin), says
the delegates
were not sanctioned ; but
it is well known that they were sanctioned, both by the Governor General and
the Home Government. He says, also,
that scheming measures were
employed to
force it through the Legislature.
There
might have been scheming, but I think if
such were the case, it was carried
on by
those of whom he seems to have the most
knowledge. With regard to the conference being conducted with closed doors,
I think, although such is the usual course,
that it would have been better to have
made it public. It is said that Confederation would have had on injurious influence
on our finances ; but the opening
up of our country, the introduction of
foreign capital, the cultivation of our soil,
DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1865. 125
the natural results which would flow
from Union—would have proved at
immense benefit to the country. And then
the question of defence is one of great
importance. If we are to be
protected,
and if Imperial interests here are to be
protected, we ought to know it
at oncethe sooner the better. The hon. President of the Council has now gone
into the
question pretty fully ; but it is said that
he was invited to discuss the matter in
public by Mr. Tilley, before the
elections,
and declined.
Mr. CONNELL —I
am glad to hear it,
for the people would very much have
liked to hear the arguments for
and against
the Scheme from such able men. I regret
that that distinguished
gentleman is not
now on the floors this House to
cope
with the hon. President of the Council.
But I think that there are men
still on the
floors of this House, who, though humble,
will be able to adduce arguments as convincing to the public mind as those given
by those opposed to the Scheme, and they
will be so convinced that a change will
take place. It is said that the question
is
to be forced on the people of this Province. The hon. member for St. John,
(Mr. Anglin), puts his views before the
public, and they should be replied to. It
is to be regretted that he can come here
and discuss the question, while
Mr. Tilley's
mouth is shut.
Mr. CONNELL.—Yes,
the people shut it ;
but who shut the mouths of these
gentlemen before the elections, when the people
might have been informed on the
subject
by a full discussion of it ? The hon. member for St. John says, there are
plotters.
and tricksters, and schemers all around
us, at the corners, on the streets, in the
hotels, and he applies these
terms to the
men who are in favor of Confederation.
But I should like to know who were the
plotters in Ireland in 1848 ?
Perhaps if
he were to go Home as one ol the delegates, he would be well known by
his
antecedents, and it might come out, and
maybe that would be as good a
way as
any to cut off some of these plotters and
schemers. I think we should have heard
less about plotters if some hon. gentlemen
had stayed in the home of their fathers. I
was born in this country, and I remember
when there were not more than fifty
houses on the upper St. John, and they
were the homes of those who have made
the bone and sinew of the country. But
new comers step in and take it upon
themselves to call our people
plotters and
schemers ; the very men who are
upholding the rights and interests of the Province are thus called. The
majority of
votes east in opposition to Confederation
were by men who are not natives of this
Province ; but I think a short time will
suffice to convince many of them that they
were in error,—many of them are so already. The reason why I speak strongly
on this subject is that I am strongly in
favor of Confederation, and so these
terms may be applied to me. But
even
though the question comes up before this
people again, and fail to he
carried, we
will not rebel,—as it was said on
the
floors of this House that if Co federation
carried, those who opposed it would
have rebelled. Why, this
question of Confederation was urged on the old colonies
by Benjamin Franklin, and why did
he
fail to carry through his measure? Because the British Government were opposed to
it, and afraid that their power
would be lost if the Colonies united.
They said
if we allow them to unite we
shall lose all control over them ; they are
increasing in numbers and strength, and
we shall not be able to hold them. But
what is the case now? Instead of this
the Imperial Government are anxious that
we should unite, and feels that her power
would be strengthened by it. If this had
been the case before the revolution, instead of now being divided up into a vast
number of States, the British flag would
have floated over the whole of this continent. But in spite of all, Franklin stood
to his post ; neither gifts nor emoluments
could move him from his purpose.
Mr. CONNELL.— His son was appointed
as Governor of one of the Colonies ; but
that is what a Colonist can't get now, although I believe they would make as good
Governors as those that come from across
the water.
Mr. CONNELL.— Yes, but Mr. Hinks was
an Irishman. He lived in Canada, and I
wish he were out here now ; he would have
carried through a railway system before
this. I think that we in these Colonies
have men of ability and talents that fit
them for the office of Governor ; we should
still have a link to bind us to England- the Governor General. I would not object
to have a French Canadian for Governor
of this Province, by way of exchange, for
they have men of talent and influence
there, who would fill the office well,—so
they have in Nova Scotia. Among distinguished and able men I need only
mention the name of the Hon. Joseph
Howe, of Nova Scotia, and the Hon. J.
A. MacDonald, of Canada. I think we
need not look upon ourselves as so very
diminutive ; we have men who have gone
away from us and became famous. Look
at the Inglis, of Nova Scotia, and General
Williams, of Kars. I have no doubt that
the hon. President of the Council and the
hon. membrr for St. John, (Mr. Anglin),
will be appointed delegates to go home,
and show the people of England what a
great wrong they intend to inflict upon
us. And yet I hope there will be some
means by which we shall be able to show
the British Government that there was a
very large minority in favor of Confederation, and that it has been stated that the
people have not had a fair chance to test
the question. I believe the not getting
it has already shown that we should have
been financially and commercially better
off it we had got it. I believe that the
great minority will not be over-ridden by
the delegates who go home. The Government are the patriots now ; they hold the
interests of the people in their hands,
they guide the ship of State, and should
keep it off the shoals in time of peril. We
shall see what they can do in managing
the affairs of a country with 250,000 inhabitants, less than many towns in England.
In Nova Scotia the question is in
abeyance ; but I hope that it will be decided favorably. In Lower Canada there
was but a small minority in opposition to
the Scheme, and that was led by Mr.
Dorion, the leader of the Rouge party.
I oppose the delegation now, because I
believe it will be useless. I happen to
know that it will have no effect there. I
will now close by quoting the opinion of
a great Colonist, (General Williams), expressed in a speech made at Toronto. He
is not a " conspirator;" he did not conspire against the people of England ; he did
not publish his feelings and triumph in a paper when the British soldiers were compelled
to retire before the Russian troops ; but
he is a man, and a General, whose name
will go down to posterity with honor :
" The concluding paragraph of your
address alludes to the great questions
of colonial policy which at the present
moment are under discussion, and expresses your regrets that I should quit your
shores during that discussion. I nevertheless leave you with every hope that the
unity of all the British Provinces will be
a great fact, which will grow out of the
mature, calm and friendly debates now in
progress. I think those legislators will at
last come to the right conclusion, and that
unity and strength will take the place of
division and weakness. This unity bears
with greater weight upon the defences of
those vast colonies than it does on the
commercial advantages, which are in
themselves obvious and most important."
Mr. GILBERT.—Mr. Chairman, the Resolutions in your hand, which have been
submitted by the hon. member for Saint
John (Mr. Cudlip) express that the Confederation of the B. N. A. Provinces
would be injurious to the best interests of
these Colonies, and recommends that a
delegation proceed to England to force
that idea on the ministry of that country.
I have listened with a great deal of attentention, and I may say patience too, to
the long address of the hon. member from
the County of Carleton. He says he has
given this subject his attention prior to
the elections, and turned it over, and revolved it in what he is pleased to term
his mind, and come to the conclusion that
it will be beneficial. I have listened ,
willing to be convinced, ready to yield
to reason whether it comes from a friend or
an opponent ; and I must confess I have not
discovered anything to lead me to believe
that his premises are correct. When, in
the early part of Session, we had under discussion the the Governor's Speech, I
took occasion to express my disappointment at the policy which the Government
were pleased to set forth in that Speech, I
not in reference to a Union of the Colonies, but in reference to the great public
works which should have been taken up. I
said I regretted that the Government was
not formed on any defined policy. I then
expressed my desire and intention to give
them my support so far as they introduced measures which I believed for the good
of the country. Not taking my position
as a tame follower, or servile supporter
of the Government, I have supported
them when their measures were good, and
opposed them when I considered they
were not so. On the Militia Bill I opposed them, as I thought the money could be
better expended. The Post Office Bill I
supported, thinking it would save some
$3,000 or $4,000 a-year to the country.
I supported the Treasury Note Bill also,
because I believed it would be the means
of saving a large amount of money to the
country. And now lest the people might
misconstrue my position on Confederation, I desire to express my opinions on
these Resolutions, so that I may not be
misinterpreted or misunderstood by my
constituents on a question, the greatest
that ever came before this House. I say
it is of great importance, and therefore
we feel a deep regret that we are called
on to discuss it, for it has not grown out
of our wants, but of the local necessities
of Canada—out of the differences which
exist between Upper and Lower Canada,
and their pecuniary difficulties. We all
126 DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1865.
regret that the late Government took. ?ld
with such avidity and adopted
the Canadian views, without having come to this
House and asked the appointment of the
delegation. I think if this had been
done, from my knowledge of the position
they held in the estimation of the Imperial Government, although they ran round
from place to place on a regular spring
and autumn tour, yet they would
have been
met by nothing more than a Resolution
of want of Confidence. The Constitution
of a country cannot be changed except
by
the consent of the people, or by
the
employment of force. In matters
that did
not contemplate the annihilation
of the
Constitution, it would have been
legitimate to appoint a delegation ; but to discuss the Constitution under which they
were acting was unconstitutional. If they
had come to this House and asked
for a
delegation, they would have been met by
a vote of want of confidence, and we
should have had an incoming Government who would have appointed a delegation which
would have
represented the
true ideas of the people, instead of
a delegation which represented the views and
feelings of the late Government only. In
the late election in my County
the question stood on that of Confederation ;
although they felt the do-nothing policy of
the Government they would not
make the
election turn on any thing but
Confederation or non-Confederation. I say this
Scheme, as far as I have looked
into it, is a
one-sided Scheme ;
a Scheme
by which
the interests of Canada would be promoted to our detriment ; a Scheme for the
legislation of British North
America
which would be entirely Westward, a territory immense when compared with ours.
The preponderance in ten years
would be
largely in favor of Western Canada.
This we know, and if it contemplated to
open up their canals,
and populate that
great country west of Lake Superior,
that
would increase the population
greater than
ever. The great influence then would be
centred in Western Canada, and the
power would be all in the their hands.
Those delegates who visited us
said we
have the population element, and the agricultural element, we want your maritime element.
If they valued our maritime element, why did they not
leave the
seat of Government to be settled afterwards? Why did they not appoint St, John
or Halifax as the place where the
archieves
of a great people should he deposited.
where ships of war could come
and
protect them? Why did they place it at
Ottawa, on the head waters of a river far
in the interior? I look upon the choice
of the seat of Government as one
of vast
importance, as of great importance as
when they took the capital from Ireland
to England, from which influences grew
up to the detriment and destruction of
Ireland. Our population and our capital
would all go to Canada, and we
should
become the hewers of wood and drawers
of water to them. How much do they
value our maritime element ?
They give
us fifteen members out of 194, according
to population. Now the question of representation by population is a debatable
one. We have a great country, with a
noble river running through it, one
of the
finest in the world, with a great extent
of
sea board, and a territory larger than that
of Great Britain. Why did not the delegates urge our importance upon them ?
Suppose this principle were applied to
the kingdom of Scotland, as compared to
the City of London, with her great
natural beauties her mountains, her
valleys
and lakes and mines, would the people
have submitted to it for a moment?
Would it not be unjust that a whole country should have a less representation than
a City, merely because her population
was less? And shall we be neutralized
and equalized by the Cities of Montreal
and Quebec. These Cities have as great
a population as all New Brunswick. There
is one thing that requires explanation, and
that is, why the Conference carried on
their deliberations in secret conclave ; the
hon. President of the Council has very
ably referred to this. It is not constitutional. Look at the history of the United
States, and the discussion on the framing
of their Constitution.
Mr. MCMILLAN.—Will the hon. member say that when they were framing the
constitution of the United States that they
discussed it openly.
Mr. GILBERT.—There
might have been
some preliminaries that were attended to
in secret, but it was openly debated,
but
of this Conference at Quebec we are not
able to get the opinions of the men who
framed the Scheme ; we are shut out from
asking the delegates, for they are not now
in the House, and they were afraid to
bring the matter before the late House.
On Section 71, we require some information. It reads thus, ' That Her
Majesty
the Queen be solicited to
determine the
rank and name of the Federated Provinces." What does that mean? Was not
the idea that we should still be a Colony
depending on England? Did they
intend
to establish a Viceroy here with all the
pomp and circumstance of Royalty ?
Would any man vote for that? Let us not
copy after antiquated Europe ; let us copy
anything that is beneficial ; but for Heaven's sake not the antiquated
forms that
do no good. Imagine the hon. ex-Surveyor General, on bended knee kissing the
boney hand of a Viceroy ; he would have
no objection to kiss a lady's hand, that
would be nice enough, but I do not think
he would be willing to try the
other. I
think these Colonies have a mark to make
in History, when they become able to fly
their own flag, but that time has not yet
arrived. We even now can compare with
almost any country save England, France,
the United States and perhaps Russia in
our commercial importance as
owners of
tonnage, and if we had it all within the
borders of our own Province it
would be
all right ; but with a line to defend from
the farther Cape of Newfoundland
to the
head waters of Lake Superior,
and a population sparse and scattered along the whole
of this line, numbering only some four
millions, it would be folly to think of
hoisting our own flag and striving to guide
the ship of State. Does any one suppose
would put up with dictation from
Downing
Street? Look at our own House
with
only 41 members ; we will not
submit to
their dictation in anything that we think
is injurious to our inserests ; and would
the united Colonies long remain attached
to the mother country ? They would not ;
we should soon all be "gobbled up" by
the neighbouring republic, and I am not
prepared as a descendant of the old refugees, wtth the blood of the Loyalists
in my
veins, to be annexed to the United States.
And when the time comes for us to go off
by ourselves, will this one-sided
Scheme
be the one to be adopted ? No :
it
will be
one that is fair in every respect. We shall
then have a population of some fifteen
millions, and then we may heave the anchor, hoist the sails and steer the ship of
State without fear of breakers. If this
question has not been decided as it has
been, the consequences would have been
most
disastrous. The hon. member has
referred to the Upper House of twenty-
four members being able to put a veto
upon anything that might prove disadvantageous. But it is well known that the
Upper House cannot always hold out
against the people's House ; this has been
proved in the House of Lords in England,
and at last they must yield. Our very
best rights would be jeopardized, and if
we have no local rights then why should
we keep up a local Parliament here, and
another in Nova Scotia ? We have heard
of delegations proceeding from Canada, as
the most influential of the British North
American Colonies, to make known the
state of the Provinces, and it seems they
wish to bring to bear the powerful influence of England, to force us to this
Union. They doubtless intend to press
the Scheme, and leave room for us to
come in afterwards. I think the Government very wise in bringing in their resolutions,
for although they come from an
independent member, yet I presume from
the remarks of the Hon. President of the
Council that the Government sanction it.
This is something practical, and although
I am opposed to delegations as a general
thing, this one under the circumstances
has my support, and I think the Government will act wisely and well in sending
our best men to "frustrate their knavish
tricks."
Mr. MCCLELLAN.—The hon. member
(Mr. Gilbert) says something about frustrating their knavish tricks, and further
says that he has Loyalist blood in his
veins ; I think the difference between him
and his good old ancestors is, that whereas they suffered because they stood by the
British Government, their descendant
will
not. With regard to this question, I am
only anxious that the people should have
a full and clear statement laid before
them. The Hon. President of the Council, previous to the elections, travelled
round through our part of the country
expounding his views ; I had no time to
reply to him then, and therefore it will be
expected that I should do so now in reply
to his speech of yesterday. The Hon.
President of the Council said our delegation should have gone to the Conference
and returned without pledging themselves
to any Scheme.
Hon. Mr. SMITH.—I said that it was
unprecedented that a constitution should
be changed without being submitted to
the people.
Mr. MCCLELLAN.—Now I do not know
what our constitution really is ; I thought
we had always been under the British
Government and Constitution, and I cannot see how the fact of the delegates going
to Quebec to confer with regard to
the management of our local Government
can affect the constitution at all. It was
all right they admit to go to Charlottetown for this purpose, and why then could
they not extend their operations. Since
this Province has been under a seperate
Government there have been a good many
delegations on different subjects, some on
a Union of Colonies, some on Railways, to one of which the Hon. President
of the Council belonged, and I think then
the question of Union was discussed ; at
any rate I think I can show from the
Journals that the question has been discussed. Nearly all these delegates went
without the knowledge of the people or
consent of the House, and this is a good
precedent. But the delegates to Quebec
had authority.
Hon. Mr. BOTSFORD.—Sir. R. G. Mac-
Donnell says they had not, and Mr. Card-
well agrees with him.
DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1865. 127
Mr.
MCCLELLAN —Another point dwelt
upon was the origin of the idea
of a Union
of the Colonies. I do not know whether
he refers to the difference in the race and
creed of the Canadians. He quotes from
Mr. Galt's speech, and says these difficulties were sufficient in themselves-
Hon. Mr. SMITH.—No ; I said that the
idea was form from these difficulties.
Mr. MCCLELLAN.—He
said the difficulties were sufficient in themselves to bring
this about, but it might have been
lapsus
linguce. But let us look at the
opinion of
the Lower Canadians on this point. Mr.
McClellan here read from Cartier's speech,
who is a Frenchman himself, to show that
the difference of races and religions was
an additional argument in favour of Union;
thus merging everything in one
general
rally around one general constitutional
Government, filled from petty
sectarian, or
national, factious, impediments and entanglements. That I think is a much
higher view to take than to bring it
down
to a matter of creed and races, and to get
her out of her difficulties while we incur
none ourselves by this great Union. It is
somewhat embarrassing to rise and speak
for Confederation, for we may be charged
with being actuated by selfish motives
; it
may be said that we are looking toward
Ottawa. I should like to see the Hon.
President of the Council at Ottawa. for I
am sure his abilities would shine there,
and I think he would gain a wider and a
higher view of the wants of these Colonies. It is a poor principle, however, to
refuse great national benefits, because
some personal benefit may arise from it.
If this principle were to hold then all
would be precluded from doing anything
for the good of mankind. But all these
charges of ambitious and selfish motives
need not be confined to one side. May
we not also ask if the Hon.
President of
the Council did not in the position he took,
see his present seat looming up in the
distance ? I say nothing against it ; I am
glad to see him there, and should like to
see him higher, but I do not
like to see
him in his present company. Is he not as
open to these kind a charges as these
delegates ? Did not some other office
even than that he now occupies open up
before him ? And I do not blame him if
it did. I do not say it was so,
but simply
that he is as open to such charges as
others. He says the Government was unpopular ; why not say that they
were a
dead weight on Confederation ? And that
if as they went down the great talents of
my hon. and learned friend were to be
called up, there would be chance opened
for many for office and emolument ; I
say
this might have been if the principle he
enunciates be true. Although this question has been a long time before the
mother country, yet it has only
been a
short time before our people, and to take
up a great principle and oppose it on the
simple basis of taxation is
certainly taking advantage of the ignorance
and credulity of the people. This argument of the
opponents of the Scheme had its weight.
And then in the southern part of the Province the people were vary much
guided
by ecclesiastical influences ; for although
the Archbishop of Halifax had boldly come
out and declared in favor of the Scheme,
yet by some means or other the priests in
the southern part of the Province at least
were combined to use their influence over
the people to vote against it.
(This proposition was denied by
Hon.
Mr. Anglin on the part of the Catholic
Clergy of St. John, and by
Mr. Landry on
the part of those of Westmorland.—
REPORTER.)
My impression at any rate is that such
was the case. I do not wish to utter a
word against that body, but I do believe
that a strong and combined effort was put
forth to get the people to oppose it. I
do not say, and I do not believe that it
was general, for I know many intelligent
and respectable men of that church who
were favourable to it.
Mr. L. P. W. DESBRISAY.—I would ask
if the clergymen of other denominations
used their influence in favor of the
Scheme? I know they did.
Mr.
MCCLELLAN.—They might have
done so, and if the hon member knows
that such was the case he need not have
asked.
(At this stage there was considerable
disorder arising from a regular round of
calls to order as one member after another stood up to say something with regard
to the length of the speeches of different
members, and the state of feeling which
should be exhibited by the supporters of
the Government toward the small opposition, at the close of which Mr. Wetmore
remarked that if hon. members choose to
go outside and get crammed and plugged
with what to say indoors, he did not know
that other hon. members need to put
themselves out at all to listen, but the
speakers could get the plugging out as
best they could. The Reporter was in
his place and that was enough.—REPORTER.)
Mr.
MCCLELLAN.—I do not know what
the hon. member for the City of Saint
John means by cramming and plugging,
but from such expressions becoming frequent of late and appearing in the Reports,
I am getting used to it. He cannot stifle free discussion in this House, if
such did prevail at elections. It seems to
be inferred that all who are opposed to
Confederation must necessarily be in favor of these Resolutions. Now although
there may be a majority here against the
Scheme, yet they may not all be willing to
appoint the delegation, as the people of
England by the
Times and the action of
this country know all about it. There
may be many who may think the state of
the country will not admit of these splendid delegations. We heard that we were
not to have so many of them as heretofore, but the anxiety to have one now appointed
puts me in mind of a boy going
through a churchyard and whistling to
keep his courage up. It seems as though
after all the apparent carelessness as to
the result that there was a feeling lest
Confederation was not quite dead yet, or
at least that it might after all rise up and
frighten them. I do not know who the
delegates will be, probably the hon. President of the Council and the hon. member
from Saint John, (Mr. Anglin) will be
among them, and if so it may be as well
for the one to visit the home of his childhood and the familiar scenes that will be
presented to him there, the other may
perhaps go to Paris, where he would have
a very nice time of course, and all at the
people's expense. The Resolutions now
under discussion clearly affirm that the
judgment of the people has been pronounced, and that Her Majesty's Government has
been apprised of the fact, and
it goes on to ask the appointment of a
delegation to go home to tell them again. I
will now read a little article I have here,
transcribed from the London
Times to
the columns of the
Freeman with the comments of A ?
an hon. correspondent who
does not report the remarks of members
always fairly or correctly : " Confederation comes to us from the Colonies and it
is for the Colonies to decide upon it. We
cannot coerce the New Brunswickers into
a new political union, nor can
we object
to their remaining in the
position which
they have so long occupied without complaint on our part or theirs." The hon.
member, (Mr. Anglin) quoted the
Times,
to justify his position. I give the above, as
his own quotation too—a complete
offset.
The hon. President says the sayings of
public
men can be properly referred to. He was a public man in 1857, and what
did he then say in this House of Mr. Til-
ley,
when that gentleman had been rejected by his constituents on another question.
He (Mr.Smith) deeply regretted the absence from office of the late Provincial
Secretary, Mr. Tilley. To that gentleman, who was now within his hearing—so
was he yesterday—he would offer no eulogism ; but this he would say, his absence
from the office was a great loss, and was
so regarded throughout the whole Province, where his talent and honesty were
known and recognized.
Was it such a
man who would lend himself to the
systematic ruin of the Province ? or
were hon.
members to be told by the political proteous who now held the office that
Mr.
Tilley was not fit to discharge his duty,
&c.. &c." What change has "come over
the spirit of his dreams,"- -the political
proteus, his colleague now, is converted
into a miracle of finance, and the Hon.
Mr. Tilley has been plotting and conspiring to enslave
his native country ! It is
perfectly understood that
Confederation
will not be forced on this
country, and yet
I heard an hon. member say that
unless
a delegation were sent Home
this conspiracy would have its effect, and the
country would be enslaved. I can
imagine my hon. friend going to
Fishmonger
Hall and making his mark there ; but I
hope if they go they will tell not only the
truth, but the whole truth. Tell them
that the number of Anti-Confederate
members in this House does not correspond with the feeling on the question in
the country. I hope that they
will show
that there were not over six hundred
votes majority against the Scheme in the
late elections, and that many of those who
opposed it then have since changed their
views. This is the case I know in Albert ;
I find, in conversation with intelligent
men, that it is so in Fredericton, and I
hear it is the same in many other parts of
the country. I hope they will tell the
people of England and Ireland, or where-
ever they go, that the people of
this
Province are not such fools as to reject
Colonial Union—a Union upheld by all
the colonists of distinction
for the past
half century. The Hon. Joseph Howe
has always stood up for this Union, and
so has Judge Johnston, a man of the
highest attainment.
I may here advert to a remark of Lord
Durham, to show that a Colonial Union
was necessary in the opinion of that
eminent constitutionist, in order to rid
the separate colonies of the
disorders
arising from the influence of designing
and ambitious individuals, as by affording a large scope for the desires of such
men as shall direct their ambition into
the legitimate character of
furthering,
and not of thwarting, their
Government.
" By creating high prizes, in a
general
and responsible Government, we
shall
immediately afford the means of pacifying the turbulent ambitious, and
of employing,
in worthy and noble occupations, the talents which are now only
exerted to foment disorder." I am
anxious to give my friend, the President
of the Council, a wider scope for
his
powers and ability, and I hope
that he
128 DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1865.
will not take
any ground that may tend
to foment any differences that
may exist
in Canada, but to pursue such a course
as will cement us all into a
great and
united people. He says that the late
Government did not intend to
submit
the scheme to the people. They
clamoured for the delegates to go to the people, and when this was done, the
cry
was reversed, and the charge was made
of cruelty to the people, to make them
go about in the frost and snow and cold.
But I think the time was not inopportune ; the people were mostly at liberty
to give their attention to the subject ;
there was no pressing duties
from
they had to be taken to go to
the polls,
but it was a time when they
could best
spare their time and labour.
Hon. Mr. SMITH.—My
hon friend
seems to desire to make me say
that it
was cruelty and oppression to submit
the
question to the people, but I say it
was cruel to do so in the winter, at that
most inclement season.
Mr. MCCLELLAN.—In the course of his
remarks the Hon. President of the Council referred ?
Mr. Galt's speech, and
inferred from ?
that Mr. Tilley, in his
address, was not actuated by proper
views, and had taken ground he should
not have done. I notice that the hon.
President of the Council has changed
his views with regard to that gentleman.
In 1857 he lost his election, and the hon.
President of the Council was placed in
the opposition, and in a speech he then
made in this House he eulogized Mr.
Tilley, who was then standing in the
gallery, as he was the other day when
the remarks of the hon. President of the
Council were not so flattering. I mention this merely to show that people's
minds change.
Mr. MCCLELLAN.—He referred to Mr.
Galt's speech at Sherbrooke, and in reply to that I have an extract from a
speech of Mr. Dorion, who is on the
same side as the hon. President of the
Council, which I shall read to shew his
opinion of the scheme, as giving to New
Brunswick a great advantage over Canada, in a financial and commercial
point of view. Mr. Dorion opposes the
scheme because the people of New
Brunswick get the best of the bargain.
The hon. President quotes Galt's speech
at Sherbrooke, to shew the origin of the
movement, which proves nothing, unless it be that to remove a social or political
evil existing amongst our Canadian fellow-colonists without at the
same time injuring ourselves, forms an
objectionable feature. Surely the hon.
member ought to attach great weight to
the arguments of Mr. Dorion, who, like
himself, has the
patriotism to oppose
British interests, and Colonial progress. A fellow-feeling ought to make
them co-incident in opinion, if not
wondrous kind to each other. Another objection taken was, the Bills
framed by the local Legislatures would
be liable to be disallowed by the General Government. I do not see the point
of this objection, as our local bills may
now be disallowed by a power farther
off, and whereas in the General Government we should have representatives to
explain and support them, in England
we have none at all. Then another, objection was, a large expenditure of
money would be made on canals in Canada. It is evident, however, that this is
entirely dependent on the state of the
finances ; it is not made a basis of the
scheme, but a subject for future consid
eration. It may be found necessary to
extend the canals of Western Canada,
but the lines would all be taken away,
and we should not look upon Canada or
New Brunswick, but upon one great
united country. The hon. member has
further said that our voice will not be
heard in Canada ; but taking our representatives in both branches our voices
would be something after all, and then
we shall have more there after a while,
for our increase of population is 3 per
cent, while that of Lower Canada is only
2 1-2 per cent. And then there is no
danger of our being swamped by Western Canada. How has it been in the
United States? Where does the population centre and increase most? Is it
not on the sterile sea coasts? There the
manufactories arise, there the mechanics
and artizans congregate, whilst the
great and fertile interior is given up to
the pursuits of agriculture. The hon.
President of the Council further said
that our railway would, before long, be
likely to pay per cent interest, and it
would be folly to give this up. He must
think the country is improving very
fast, and that the population is also increasing. I want these delegates, who
go home, to tell them in Downing Street
the truth and the whole truth, to tell the
views of the people of this Province,
and the means used by the Antis to carry
our their purposes. Tell them that in
the Upper House there is a large majority, men of the highest respectability,
who are in favor of this scheme. I do
not know how they regard this branch
of the Legislature, but I think they deserve the thanks of this people. Today I learn
that the third Government
Bill this Session has been laid aside by
that body. There was the Banking Bill,
the result of twenty years study, summarily disposed of ; then the Treasury
Note Bill, that wheel-barrow steam engine, double-back-action, money-producing machine,
is thrown out, as it
ought to have been, and now the Post
Office Bill, that was to move the office
to St. John, and save so much money
to the country. I want the delegates to
tell them that that House has a large
majority in favor of Confederation. The
hon. member says our railroad is good
to give up, but he says nothing of the
the value of public works in Canada. He
does not speak of their 234 miles of
canals, costing $16,000,000 ; the Victoria Bridge, costing $10,000,000 ; the
lines of railway, 2000 miles ; their navigable lakes ; their 4000 miles of telegraph
&c. &c. &c.
Hon. Mr. SMITH.—Does the hon.
member mean to say that the railways
in Canada would belong to the General
Government?
Mr. MCCLELLAN.—Let me get through.
I wish to say that these are all great public works in Canada in which the people
have an interest. Another remark was
about the Conference being carried on
with closed doors.
(
Mr. MCCLELLAN here quoted from
" Guizot's Life of Washington," to prove
that the Convention of America, held their
consultations with closed doors.)
But we need not look to the United
States for a precedent, the same thing is
done in all countries when any change is
considered requisite in the form of the
Constitution, and the hon. President of
the Council would have had closed doors
too if he had been a delegate. And if it
be wrong to hold secret sessions on matters of this nature, why not have the doors
of the Executive Council thrown open, so
as to let the people know all that is going on? Now about the bearing of the
Union on the country financially. My
friends Mr. McMillan has taken up and
treated on it length. Mr. Dorion thinks
New Brunswick would get the best of the
not most important part of the Scheme.
We should be all fellow-colonists, and if
one man gets a few more cents than another it is not worth talking about. In the
consideration of such a question as this,
I hold that taking into consideration the
deductions that will be made, that we
shall have enough to carry on the General Government without taxing the people more
than a few cents a head more,
and this not worthy to be thought of
when we look at the great principles of
trade and defence relying upon it. These
are the higher magnitude and more worthy
of the attention of statesmen. I think
that even without the Intercolonial Railroad, it will be shown that we should
have the best of the bargain, yet when we
remember that we are to get over 200
miles of this road built through the heart
of our country, it is sufficient argument
against any cry of taxation that has been
raised. It may do at election times, and
people may be influenced by it for a time,
but when they learn that the amount we
are to pay for a Steamer on the North
Shore is about as much as our share of
interest on the amount that would carry
on the work of road, they will change
their views. The hon. member for St.
John spoke of the remarks he made at the
dinner given to the Canadians at Stubb's
hotel, where he said that they need not
interpret the feelings of the people of the
Province as favorable to a Union by the
demonstrations with which they were received ; but did he not go on to say, what
is stated as a fact, that he further observed that we must either have Confederation
or Annexation ?
Mr. MCCLELLAN.—It was so reported,
and I did not hear that it had ever been
denied, or that it was susceptible of denial. But now Confederation is to be
killed, and we are to have a Western
Railroad to assist in carrying us into the
United States. I am not averse to Western Extension, but I do wish to have the
Intercolonial road, when it can be built at
so small a cost.
Mr. MCCLELLAN.—Where is the Government going to get money to carry on
public works now, the Banking Bill is defeated? I might go on to speak of the
influences brought to bear on our electoral franchise, and our little country, not
larger in proportion than many towns in
England, while with the smaller Provinces
the same still more applies. When there
are so few offices, and so many to fill
them ; when there are so many members
in the Government, and each wanting to
be a general, it shows that we need a
larger House ; where everything of a general interest to the Colonies could be discussed
without party or money interests,
and be carried out on the plan of the English Government, which has been found to
work so well. The Hon. President of the
Council referred to the four corners of the
Constitution. I don't know exactly what
that means, nor how it is made up, but
perhaps it may be that one is the Military
corner in the person of the Hon. Attorney
General ; the Social corner represented
by the Hon. Chief Commissioner of the
Board of Works ; Financial corner per
DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1865. 129sonified by the hon. member for St. John,
who introduced the Treasury Note
Bill ;
and the Patriotic corner so ably
represented by the other hon. member for St.
John in the Government. It will be seen
the Council, and the Hon. Provincial
Secretary ; they are not corner stones, and
should not be in it at all, and I hope they
will attach themselves to some other party
and work in a different manner—more in
accordance with their political antecedents.
But there is a military point of view in
which this matter should be viewed. I
trust there will be no difficulty with the
United States ; I have favored the North
all through their struggle, but we all
know that the Americans are avaricious of
increased territory. We know that under the Ashburton Treaty they took a
good slice off us, and that would not have
been done it we had been united. Then
on the Pacific Coast it was the same, and
now they are casting longing eyes and
would very much like to get a slice of the
fertile belt of the Red River Settlement.
They have 10,000 miles of Railways projected, and it is stretching out to cover
the continent ; but if united these encroachments would cease at least in our
direction.
J. M.
Cet individu a participé aux :
