Mr. Smallwood I give notice that I will on
tomorrow ask His Excellency the Governor in
Commission to ask the Government of Canada to
state whether, in the event of union and the consequent operation of the Newfoundland
railway
and steamship system by Canada, it would be the
policy of the Government of Canada to continue
in their employment all the employees of the
system at the time of union, with the rights and
privileges with respect to continuity of employment that are accorded to employees
of the
Canadian National Railways.
Mr. Cashin Mr. Chairman, I should like to bring
to the attention of the delegates and to the country
an article which appeared in a local newspaper
on Saturday last, November 29. It reads as follows and is captioned:
Duplessis is to Challenge Decision
by Privy Council
Quebec, November 29: Formal notice has
been served upon Ottawa, Newfoundland
and the Privy Council that this province apparently does not consider that the judgment
rendered by the Council about twenty years
ago, taking part of Labrador away from
Quebec and awarding it to Newfoundland,
constitutes a final settlement of this highly
controversial issue. Quebec's newsy
premier, Hon. Maurice Duplessis revealed
this at a press conference yesterday afternoon, when he referred to the mineral possibilities
and probabilities of Ungava, or New
Quebec, much of which is located in
Labrador.
"This great mineral wealth uncovered is
particularly important, and we are pleased to
say that two-thirds of this vast territory incontestably is located in the Province
of
Quebec," said Mr. Duplessis, who then went
on to make an unusually important statement,
when he declared that "One-third is a territory upon which we consider that we have
rights."
He referred to this one-third in question at
another point as "One third which was attributed by a judgment of the Privy Council
and by the present federal government to the
colony of Newfoundland." The whole matter
came up when the premier told reporters that
he had just received a visit from J. I. Rankin,
the managing director of N.A. Timmins,
Regd., the Timmins Interests, and those controlling the Hollinger North Shore Exploration
Co. Ltd., which firm is doing the mineral
exploration and exploitation work in Ungava. Mr. Duplessis goes on, "The first
reports of the work which I have just received
indicate that tons of unsurpassable mineral
wealth was found and this is only the result
of the investigation which relatively speaking was a most incomplete one...."
Asked exactly what minerals had been
uncovered, the premier replied, "Vast quantities of mineral ore, iron most definitely
and
I think gold and possibly other minerals too.
I did not get detailed information to any
extent." He goes on, "The results to date are
all the more remarkable and the future possibilities and probabilities extraordinary",
he
pointed out, "when it is considered that the
Hollinger interests are working only a portion of a section of 1,500 square miles
out of
the entire New Quebec or Ungava Territory,
which has an area of more than 311,000
square miles."
Mr. Duplessis recalled that all this vast
and exceptionally rich territory of more than
300,000 square miles had remained absolutely unproductive until the National Union
assumed office for a second time in 1944....
He terminated his statement by reiterating, "Quebec intends remaining the mistress
in her own home and running her own affairs,
and with the vast industrial expansion which
this province definitely established, you can
see how important it is to this province in
particular but to Canada as a whole also, that
we remain masters in our own house and
continue to administer our own affairs.
I cannot say what my fellow delegates may
think of this, but to me it seems a most extraordinary statement for the Prime Minister
of Quebec
to make. Goodness knows, this whole Convention set-up is bewildering enough. The political
fog in which our people are enshrouded today is
dense enough, without adding to our confusion
by the injection of this sort of thing. At the very
beginning of these so-called terms from Ottawa,
as contained in the Grey Book, we find in section
2 the following: "The province of Newfoundland
900 NATIONAL CONVENTION December 1947
will include the territory of Labrador defined by
the award of the Judicial Committee of the Privy
Council in 1927 as Newfoundland territory."
There we have a definite, clear-cut statement by
the Ottawa government. Yet here we have at the
same time the Quebec provincial government,
representative, mind you, of approximately one-
third of the population of Canada, and representing a political balance of power in
the
Canadian Parliament, saying that they deny this
statement — that they refuse to acknowledge
Newfoundland as being the legal owner of this
territory, and that they are going to do everything
in their power to take it from us. If the circumstances were different, my first impulse
would be to ask the Commission government
what this whole thing means. But I know that I
would be only wasting my time, because they
would not tell me. Only a few days ago, they were
asked whether we could regard the agreement
made between the Government of Great Britain
and our own government in 1933 as being at
present valid and effective, and if it were to be
followed out, and they came back with the reply
that in effect it was none of our business. Here we
have a solemn agreement made between two
governments, whereby we surrendered our
sovereignty upon certain specific terms and
which provided for the return of our lost political
life; and we are told that we should not talk about
it, that it is not within the province of us representatives of the Newfoundland people
even to
discuss it. Using the words of Winston Churchill,
"What kind of people do they think we are?" Do
they think we are so many children to be trifled
with? Do they think we do not know the nature
of a contract, and the sacred moral and legal
obligations which it entails and which are imposed upon the parties? It seems to me
that it is
time we ceased to allow ourselves, or our people,
to be used for the foolish purposes of this debating society. It is time that we realised
that we have
greater duties, greater responsibilities, greater
obligations than those which have been imposed
upon us by this narrow, farcical Convention and
its narrower terms of reference. How can we
place any dependence, any faith upon any agreement or promise made to us by any government
of Canada or, for that matter any other country,
when we see an attempt being made, as in this
case, to tear these terms of reference to bits before
we have even finished reading them?
But the point I wish to make is this: it is
impossible for us to blind our eyes to the fact that
we are obviously holding discussions with a
country a third of whose people openly and
brazenly declare they will refuse to honour the
terms now before the Chair — who openly tell
the world that they are going to spare no effort to
rob us of our rich Labrador territory. I ask my
fellow delegates: are they prepared to consider
doing business on that basis? Are they prepared
to discuss terms with a people who have openly
shown their unfriendliness — who declare that
regardless of all laws, their purpose is to wrest
from us that which is ours?
Under the circumstances, if we have respect
for ourselves, if we are sincere in our desire to
faithfully protect the interests of the people who
sent us here, we must seriously consider the
matter of throwing this confederation business
out of this chamber, and to have no more parley
with a people who threaten our well-being —
who in effect are set on a campaign to steal away
our people's wealth....
We are witnessing a spectacle which has been
repeated many times in the history of small
countries. It is the old story of the covetous eyes
and the greedy hands of bigger and more powerful countries coveting the wealth and
the assets
of the smaller country. Sometimes the big fellow
gets what he wants by political trickery, sometimes he gets it by threats and pressure;
and
failing these, he takes it by brute force. In our
Labrador possession, through the goodness of
Providence, we have been given a source of
untold wealth, a means by which this country can
obtain and hold a continued prosperity. How
long, I ask you, do you think this wealth will be
ours if we once found ourselves in the hands of
the Canadian government? I tell you that it would
be only so long as they could rig up the necessary
legal machinery to euchre us out of it.
It is all too clear now that the key to this whole
mystery is the desire of Canada to take from us
our Labrador wealth. It explains everything —
baby bonuses, old age pensions and all the rest of
it. It is a cheap enough bribe.... I make the statement now, and I am convinced that
time will bear
me out, that this entire business — referendums,
conventions and all the rest of it, has but one main
object, and that is a deliberate and preconceived
December 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 901
plot to rob this country of the unexpected wealth
of our Labrador.
Mr. Chairman I do not think you are entitled to
express that opinion.
Mr. Cashin I will go further and say that the
parties to this plot are the Government of Great
Britain, Canada and our own local Commission,
and to show how recklessly eager they are to see
this plot succeed, we find that they do not hesitate
in throwing overboard the agreement of 1933.
Mr. Chairman Unless you can lay the foundation for that statement, I do not think you ought
to go that far.
Mr. Cashin I make the statement, and I am
convinced that time will bear me out.
Mr. Chairman That may be. None of us is
omniscient; we cannot say whether time will bear
you out or not. You are making a statement of
fact. I do not think you are justified in doing that
at this time.
Mr. Cashin I want to make it clear that I am not
in the least afraid of discussing these so-called
Canadian terms, for the simple reason that I am
confident that when the people have been shown
how worthless they really are, they will feel about
them as I do. My principal objection to them is
that I see in them only a camouflage, a deceit and
a bait that is being used by those who plot against
our country, to entrap and destroy us. I will show
this Convention, and I will back it with the necessary proof, that this whole thing
had its origin
several years ago. And when the story is told, it
will be a most inglorious one for all parties concerned.
Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention to go
further into this matter at the present time. Nor do
I intend to make any motion at the moment. My
object is simply to impress on delegates the hidden significance of this latest move
on the part of
the premier of French Canada and to ask my
fellow delegates to give the matter their serious
consideration. Vigilance, it is said, is the price of
safety. Let that then be our watchword.
Mr. Chairman I have read and studied that article, Major Cashin. I cannot help expressing the
feeling that for Premier Duplessis it might be
good politics; but in my judgement it is pretty bad
law. How he or anybody else can depart from a
judgement delivered by the Privy Council 20
years ago, I cannot begin to understand.
Mr. Cashin I agree from the legal standpoint,
but as I said a few minutes ago, "time will bear
me out". You or I may not be here, but you will
find if we go into confederation with Canada, that
within five years Labrador will be taken from
Newfoundland.
Mr. Smallwood I do not know if I am in order
in speaking at this moment any more than Major
Cashin was in order. If he was in order, I take it
I am in order. I do not know what business is
before the House. I do not know if there is any
motion before the House.
Mr. Smallwood I take it that Major Cashin was
out of order and I am equally out of order, not
more so.
Mr. Chairman I allowed Major Cashin the
latitude of going on; I must allow you the same
latitude, out of order or otherwise.
Mr. Smallwood We were all interested on
Saturday to read in the
Evening Telegram a special despatch from its own correspondent in
Quebec; and to read again this morning in the
Daily News a Canadian Press despatch about the
same matter, but with a significant difference.
The story on Saturday said that Duplessis had
declared that he had served notice on the governments of Canada and Newfoundland,
and on the
Privy Council, of intending to make a move to
offset the judgement of the Privy Council 20
years ago. Whereas in the Canadian Press
despatch in the
Daily News not a single word is
said about Quebec serving notice on the governments of Canada and Newfoundland and
on the
Privy Council. We do not know Quebec in this
matter. Quebec has nothing to do with it, never
did. We never had any dispute with the Province
of Quebec.... This is a contemptible, completely
contemptible effort, an effort beneath contempt,
beyond contempt, to drag a red herring across the
trail; to create a stink so heavy, so strong — that
is what it is. We in Newfoundland have never had
anything to do with the Province of Quebec or the
Government of Quebec or the premier of Quebec
in the Labrador boundary question.
Mr. Chairman Even if we did, they have been
sleeping 20 years on their rights.
Mr. Smallwood ....There was a dispute between
the governments of Canada and Newfoundland
as to where the boundary of Labrador should lie.
There was the dispute. That dispute came up 40
902 NATIONAL CONVENTION December 1947
odd years ago — 50 years ago, in the first place...
Mr. Smallwood I am doing this to take the stink,
the smear out of it, to put it in its true perspective.
It came to the point where it could be submitted
to a court.... Finally the governments of Newfoundland and Canada agreed to submit
the matter to the highest court in the whole world insofar
as the British Empire and the British Commonwealth of Nations is concerned, ... namely
the
judicial division of the Privy Council itself....
Quebec was not in it; she had nothing to do with
it. The Government of Canada engaged its
lawyers and the Government of Newfoundland
engaged its lawyers. I have read every word of
that evidence. The Judicial Committee handed
down its verdict 20 years ago. What was the
verdict? They could see exactly where the boundary lay in some respects ... but there
was one part
they could not see where the point was, and they
said, "The height of land: find that height of land
and you have the boundary." The Government of
Canada accepted that verdict. They had no
choice...
Mr. Cashin The House knows that just as well
as you do.
Mr. Smallwood ....The matter is closed. There
is no one on this earth who could reopen it; it is
settled, finished and finalised. And now we have
it dragged in here, and why? There is an election
on in Quebec. He is not an officer of the Government of Canada, this slimy politician,
this fascist,
this Nazi, this vote-getter. He wants to be reelected, and he has dragged this in
as an election
tactic. We know all about election tactics, and we
are asked by Major Cashin to accept what Mr.
Duplessis says as being important when the cold
truth of the matter is the Government of Canada
says, the Province of Newfoundland will include
the territory of Labrador. What territory of
Labrador? The territory of Labrador defined by
the award of the Judicial Committee. Now this
dark, dismal plot that Major Cashin throws at us;
we are not surprised, because Major Cashin can
see plots where no one else can see them...
Mr. Chairman There is no motion before the
Chair. I was prepared to allow Major Cashin the
right to express himself on the point, but you are
not arguing it before the Privy Council. If you
want to comment on it briefly, I will be glad to
allow you the right; but as far as I am concerned
Mr. Duplessis is wasting his time since the party
concerned is the Dominion of Canada, not the
Province of Quebec. The only way in which Mr.
Duplessis could take over Labrador is by forcibly
invading it.... I don't think we ought to waste very
much further time on this.
Mr. Smallwood There will be an awful lot of
time wasted between now and the referendum
about Premier Duplessis and the territory belonging to our government in Labrador.
Our people
are going to hear an awful lot about this because
there has been a grievance there and this is a good
time to ventilate it, as has been done so many
times in the past by politicians.
Mr. Chairman Newspaper reports are of no
concern to me at all. They have no official standing. It is true that I did allow
Major Cashin to read
it, but from the purely parliamentary standpoint
he had no right to refer to it. After all, a newspaper
report is simply the reporter's conception of what
the thing is. When Major Cashin referred to it I
did not know his purpose, but I think I should
have allowed him a certain amount of latitude by
virtue of the fact that it did headline the
Evening
Telegram on Saturday afternoon.... I don't think
it is incumbent upon you to try to make out an
indictment against Premier Duplessis. A lot of us
know all about Premier Duplessis. We know his
antipathy to English-speaking people, and he
would cut off if he could, for no other reason, the
entry of Newfoundland, or the United States or
any English-speaking body, so as to allow his
French-Canadians to have all he thinks they
should have. As far as I am concerned, Mr.
Smallwood, I don't think there is any point in
belabouring the point....
Mr. Smallwood I won't labour the point any
more. I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask
His Excellency the Governor in Commission to
ask the Government of Canada whether the
recently published statements of the Hon. Mr.
Duplessis — the
Honourable Mr. Duplessis...
Mr. Smallwood God help us, God help us. To
ask the Government of Canada whether the
recently published statements of the Hon. Mr.
Duplessis, Premier of Quebec, on the Labrador
boundary, modify in any particular the letter and
enclosure of October 29, 1947, of the Right
Honourable the Prime Minister of Canada, particularly in clause 2 of the enclosure,
which reads
December 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 903
as follows: "The Province of Newfoundland will
include the territory of Labrador, defined by the
award of the Judicial Committee of the Privy
Council in 1927 as Newfoundland territory."
Mr. Chairman There is no motion before the
Chair, Mr. Hollett.
Mr. Hollett I was about to give notice of question, but I wanted to say a few words about the
question that has been raised
Mr. Chairman I am not going to listen to much
more on it, Mr. Hollett. It is decidedly out of
order, although I did allow Mr. Cashin to quote
from a newspaper, which I am not bound to
recognise at all. I am not bound to take notice of
any newspaper reports or anything which is apparently or allegedly happening in Canada
or
anywhere else, but if you are going to be brief, I
suppose...
Mr. Hollett I will be very brief, sir. I too was
very much perturbed when I saw the
Telegram on
Saturday.... I immediately prepared a question to
be laid on the table. There is just one other thing
that I want to draw to the attention of this House,
and that is the British North America Act, 1871,
which reads as follows: "Alteration of Limits of
Province", section III: "The Parliament of
Canada may from time to time with the consent
of the Legislature of any Province of the said
Dominion, increase, diminish, or otherwise alter
the limits of such Province, upon such terms and
conditions as may be agreed to by the said Legislature; and may, with the like consent,
make
provision respecting the effect and operation of
any such increase or diminution or alteration of
territory in relation to any province effected
thereby." Which simply means this: if we become
a province of the Dominion of Canada, the
Canadian government could alter the limits of the
Newfoundland...
Mr. Hollett The Canadian government could
alter the limits of the Newfoundland province
with the consent of the Newfoundland legislature.
Mr. Chairman I prefer to put it this way, and it
is the way I was always taught to put it: that the
areas that any province might bring with it into
confederation cannot in any way be abrogated or
taken away by the Parliament of Canada, except
by and with the express consent of the legislature.
Mr. Hollett That is exactly what I said, and I just
want to add one further remark before I put my
question, and that is this: having studied very
carefully the two Black Books which have been
brought back by the delegation to Canada, I
foresee that within the next eight years the finances of this country will be in such
a rotten state
that the legislature of Newfoundland will be
prepared to make any change in the limitation of
the province. Now this is the question which I
wish to lay on the table:
Whereas certain statements have appeared in the press of this country, as well as
in the press of the Province of Quebec, to the
effect that the premier of Quebec has served
formal notice upon the Government of Newfoundland that the province of Quebec does
not consider that the judgement of the Privy
Council in 1927 relative to the boundary
between Quebec-Labrador and Newfoundland-Labrador is the final settlement of this
issue, and whereas such statements may have
a considerable bearing upon the deliberations
and recommendations to be made by this
National Convention, I give notice that I will
on tomorrow ask the Commission of Government to lay on the table a factual statement
as
to whether such formal notice from the
Quebec government has been or has not
received by the said Commission of Government.
Mr. Smallwood Mr. Chairman, when we rose
on Friday we were at clause 22. I had got about
half way through my explanation of the clause
when the House rose, and so I do not intend now
to take very much time although, as I said then,
this is the most important clause in the entire
document. It is no harm to read it again, sir?
Should the government of the province
institute an economic survey of New
904 NATIONAL CONVENTION December 1947
foundland with a view to determining what
resources may profitably be developed and
what new industries may be established or
existing industries expanded, the Government of Canada will make available the services
of technical personnel and agencies to
assist in the work.
As soon as may be practicable after union
the Government of Canada will make a special effort to collect and make available
statistical and scientific data about the
natural resources and economy of Newfoundland, in order to bring such information
up to the standard attained for existing
provinces.
There is a story behind that clause, which the
members no doubt might like to hear. We had got
fairly well along in our talks when I raised what
I thought was a matter of fundamental importance to Newfoundland. I said, "Mr. St.
Laurent,
as long as I remember I have been hearing a
certain phrase used by people, and that is about
opening the country up — opening up Newfoundland. That is a sort of old-fashioned,
homely way of saying that we would like to have
Newfoundland developed — expanded and
developed. Now", I said, "what would confederation do to open up Newfoundland, to
open up her
resources, to develop her resources and expand
her economy?" I did not get very far at that first
meeting. One member only of the conference
supported me, and that was the Hon. Brooke
Claxton. I said it again, and still did not get very
far, but at the third one they agreed to insert a
clause covering the situation, and that clause is
here: the Government of Canada would provide
the services of technical personnel and agencies
to assist in the work. In what work? In the work
of making an economic survey of Newfoundland
to see what resources may be developed, and
what new industries may be established, or existing industries expanded, and then
it says: "As
soon as may be practicable after union the
Government of Canada will make a special effort
to collect and make available statistical and
scientific data about the natural resources and
economy of Newfoundland, in order to bring
such information up to the standard attained for
existing provinces." Wherever in these terms the
word "Newfoundland" occurs, that word includes Labrador, so that an economic survey
of
Newfoundland means an economic survey of
Newfoundland and Newfoundland-Labrador,
and that kind of survey is going to take many
millions of dollars to conduct. It cannot be done,
you cannot scour and scrape the island of Newfoundland and the 100,000 square miles
we own
down there in Labrador, for minerals and water-
powers and timber and other natural resources
without it taking several years and many millions
of dollars. And that, not family allowances, important as they are, not old age pensions,
not the
various social security payments that will come
into Newfoundland, and not the subsidies that
will be paid to the government of the province of
Newfoundland. not these things, but this clause
— the economic survey of Newfoundland — is
in my opinion the most important thing in this
entire document.
Mr. Hollett Mr. Chairman, I would like to make
a few comments with regard to that particular
section. The first thing I notice is the phrase
"Should the government of the province institute
an economic survey" — "should they". It is
problematical. I go on further: "As soon as may
be practicable" — God only knows when that
will be — "As soon as may be practicable after
union the Government of Canada will make a
special effort to collect and make available statistical and scientific data about
the natural resources and economy of Newfoundland, in order to
bring such information up to the standard attained
for existing provinces." Now, I ask members to
fix in their minds the provinces of Nova Scotia,
New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island. They
are existing provinces. they have been there, most
of them, for 70 years. I wonder if Mr. Smallwood
could tell me if this economic survey, which is
the standard for all the provinces in Canada, has
in any way affected the prosperity or otherwise
of, say, Prince Edward Island. Usually, if you
improve the economy of a country the population
of that country increases. Take Prince Edward
Island — the population has hovered around
90,000 for the last 70 years.
One more point, we have had economists in
this country galore. We have had people
prospecting for ore. All the wood we have is now
being exploited, we are catching as much fish as
we can. Did these Ottawa people indicate what
other prospects there might be in this country ... ?
I just raise the point because I don't want anyone
December 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 905
to hold out a hope that should the Canadian
government decide to make an economic survey
they would do it as soon as practicable. I wonder
if Mr. Smallwood will say a word on that?
Mr. Smallwood Mr. Hollett is, whether intentionally or unintentionally, confusing the two
paragraphs; the first paragraph deals with an
economic survey, and the second paragraph deals
only with a special effort of the Government of
Canada to collect and make available scientific
data. It is that which is to be done as soon as
practicable after union. The other thing is done
when the provincial government institutes the
survey. The reason is this: ... that if it were not
left to the Government of Newfoundland to institute and initiate the economic survey,
and the
Government of Canada stepped in on its own,
immediately what we would be hearing would
be, "Oh, I see, so without a by your leave the
Government of Canada is going to walk in and
begin surveying your resources". Should the
government of the province start it, then the
Government of Canada will step in and do the
job, so that no one can say they will ride in here
roughshod, or without permission. It's up to the
Government of Newfoundland.... The other point
is as to Prince Edward Island. We have said a lot
about PEI in the Convention in the last few days.
Is there any need for me to say once more that
PEI, although it is a province, is a little island of
2,000 square miles, one-twentieth the size of the
island of Newfoundland. It is only a large farm.
It has no industries, no natural resources apart
from the soil and the fish in the water. It has no
minerals, no oil, no timber, has no natural resources except its very fine soil and
the fish surrounding its coast. Therefore, what happens is this: a
man who had a farm in PEI of 50 acres 30 or 40
years ago, inherited it from his father who had
owned 300 acres, and the various sons took 50
acres each. Now he is married and has sons, and
there is not enough land for four or five sons to
live on, so what happens is the oldest sons stay
on, and the younger ones have to get off. When
the population grows to the point where the land
cannot support them, they emigrate to other parts
of Canada, and a good thing it is that they have
other parts to immigrate to. Let's hear no more
about this tiny little Island of Prince Edward's....
Now one other point Mr. Hollett raised on this
clause. Take the second paragraph: "As soon as
may be practicable after union". Any member of
the Convention, or any member of the public may
care to think that the Government of Canada is
just putting up a big bluff, only a cod, that they
are a crowd of cheapskates who are trying to bluff
this country; if anyone wishes to believe that he
has a perfect right to believe it. If Mr. Hollett
wishes to believe it, he has a perfect right to, and
if he says that the words, "As soon as practicable
after union the Government of Canada will do
such and such" are not worth the paper they are
written on, he is entitled so to believe.
Mr. Smallwood I am convinced of this, and it
seems to me a very reasonable belief: Newfoundland as a province of Canada is either
going
to be a drag on the Dominion of Canada, or she
is going to pay her way. One or the other. Which
would Canada want?... She would want to step in
and give us a lifting hand that would help us stand
on our own feet and be independent financially
and otherwise. That is what I believe.
Mr. Higgins I would like to make a short comment on that paragraph, particularly with respect
to the first part. I am a little disappointed in the
wording, and in the interpretation that we were
given in Ottawa, and the interpretation that Mr.
Smallwood has given today. In reading the first
part of the first paragraph, it is clearly stated that
should the Government of Newfoundland institute an economic survey and request the
Government of Canada, then the latter will make
available technical personnel or agencies to assist
in the work. It does not say, as I was led to believe,
that the Government of Canada would pay for the
work. It merely says to assist in the work. Now
how much assistance it is going to be, and who is
going to pay for it, is questionable — very questionable. They may merely provide
the personnel
and the agencies, and we will have to pay for it.
That is the meaning of the paragraph, and I would
challenge Mr. Smallwood to interpret it otherwise.
Mr. Smallwood I will very gladly do that. If Mr.
Higgins can point to one single solitary case in
the 80 years of Canadian history where the
federal government surveyed a province and
charged that province for doing it...
906 NATIONAL CONVENTION December 1947
Mr. Smallwood Charged for the services of its
personnel that it loaned to that province.
Mr. Chairman The point taken by Mr. Higgins
arises out of his interpretation of the expression
"The Government of Canada will make available
the services of technical personnel and agencies
to assist in the, work." It is not a case of what they
have done in the past for other provinces. The
question that Mr. Higgins has directed is the
interpretation to be placed upon the phrase that I
have just read, and he says it is an open question
as to how much technical personnel and agencies
are to be provided by the Dominion government,
and if and when provided, by whom and to what
extent the services are to be paid.
Mr. Smallwood It was to that point exactly that
I was addressing myself, and I said in reply,
would Mr. Higgins show me one case in the 80
years of confederation, where the Government of
Canada has conducted any survey of minerals or
water-powerm or fish or soil, for any province and
charged that province for doing it?
Mr. Higgins That is not the point, it is not what
they did in the past.
Mr. Smallwood That's exactly what it is.... ls it
its practice, when it does work for various provinces, to charge the provinces for
doing it?
Mr. Chairman What the Dominion has done
for the provinces in similar circumstances, insofar as a uniform policy may be found,
may
assist in the interpretation of this clause, but has
no direct bearing upon an interpretation of the
phrase.
Mr. Higgins We don't know officially what has
been done by the Dominion.
Mr. Smallwood You don't want me to take up
the Black Book and read again the technological
and scientific services of the Government of
Canada... There they are, we read them out the
other day, these great federal departments
employing thousands of men, expert technical
men at work all the year around. Where do they
work? Throughout the provinces of Canada
doing this survey work. They do not charge any
provincial government for the work they do. It is
borne in full by the Government of Canada, and
there is no reason in the world to suppose that in
doing that kind of survey in Newfoundland they
are going to charge for it. Where did that suggestion come from? Mr. Higgins said,
"How do we
know but they will charge us for it?"
Mr. Chairman No. Mr. Higgins is asking. Now
is your reply this: that the nature and extent of the
services to be rendered by the Government of
Canada under the concluding words of the first
paragraph of clause 22. Mr. Smallwood, has to
be resolved in the light of the technical and other
services which were mimeographed by you the
other day, and delivered to members of the
House?
Mr. Smallwood In part, sir, because remember
that that list is merely the names of the divisions,
it is not a description of their work, It is merely a
pan list ofthe various departments of the Government of Canada.
Mr. Chairman Let me go further then, as
detailed in the Black Book.
Mr. Smallwood Yes sir, and applied in Newfoundland with particular pressure in point of
time. These great federal departments of Canada
have come to Newfoundland to scour the island
and scour Labrador in an effort...
Mr. Smallwood Well, Mr. Higgins had better
not interrupt, unless he is on a point of order or
privilege.
Mr. Higgins Well, l am on a point of order. I am
asking for the interpretation of the paragraph. I
am not asking for an oration on the services
provided by the Government of Canada. How do
you sir, interpret the wording of that section?
Mr. Chairman It might not mean very much
and it might mean a great deal. Perhaps at this
time, Mr. Smallwood, however embarrassing it
might be, I will allow you to refer to the details
as given in the Black Book, and to which I now
direct your attention.
Mr. Smallwood I thank you for permission to
do that. In doing that, in view of the discussion
we had earlier today, and in view of the time, to
spare the House and the country the ordeal of
reading a description of these great federal
departments...
Mr. Chairman You might take a midway position, Mr. Higgins has addressed himself to me,
but I am afraid I cannot do anything without the
assistance of somebody.
Mr. Higgins It is only the wording, the inter
December 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 907
pretation, I am asking you.
Mr. Chairman The nature and extent of the
services envisaged by the phrase is in question,
and for that I would refer you to the volume of
the Black Book where this is referred to.
Mr. Higgins I ask you again how you interpret
the words "to assist in the work." Does it mean to
complete the work or merely to assist in the
work?
Mr. Chairman I construe this clause to mean
that the work envisaged and contemplated by the
section in question will be facilitated by the
Government of Canada by providing the technical personnel and agents. I constnte the
word
"agents" to mean technical personnel and technical agents to assist. How I constme
that is this:
there is a certainjob to be done which will require
certain technical advice and technical skill, that
technical personnel will be provided by the
Government of Canada.
Mr. Chairman No. If, for example, you are
going to build a paper mill tomorrow, you may
have 15,000 employees; but of that number, only
maybe 5% or 10% provide the technical help and
assistance. I regard this as meaning pretty well
the same thing. They will provide the technical
help and assistance.
Mr. Higgins The province will have to provide
the other services?
Mr. Chairman I think it is merely an undertaking on the part of the Canadian government to
facilitate, not to "do", by providing the technical
personnel and assistance to bring about the completion of the work; the rest and residue
falls on
the province, That is my interpretation for what
it is worth.
Mr. Smallwood Here are some of the things the
Government of Canada does...
Mr. Higgins Could we not ask the government
a straight question?
Mr. Smallwood He is quite welcome to do that.
I am about to read, at your request, sir, a description of some of the things the
Government of
Canada does.
Mr. Chairman I was asked a question about the
nature of the technical services, if the answer is
in the Black Book, you may read it.
[Mr. Smallwood then read sections of the Black
Book, Volume I, dealing with the Canadian
departments of Mines and Resources and Public
Works]
Mr. Bailey ...After this survey is carried out,
what is to be done then? Our people. even the
most ardent confederates, are looking forward in
terms of dollars and cents; what our people want
to know is how quick can all those scientific
terms be turned into cash.
Mr. Bailey I do not believe that if we went into
confederation all those scientific terms would
bring one barrel of flour into the pantry or one
piece of pork into the barrel. To my mind that is
not worth the paper it is written on.
Mr. Chairman The clause simply says they undertake to conduct an economic survey with the
idea of determining the resources that may be
properly developed and to provide, if you will,
the necessary technical help and assistance in
determination of that. The establishment of industry after that takes place is something
entirely
different, depending on world conditions, the
ability to raise money and other factors.
Mr. Bailey We have been referring to PEI pretty
often recently. I believe the population of that
Island when they went into confederation was
110,000, and today it is 92,000.
Mr. Bailey I wonder why the people cannot get
as good a living there now as they got 70 or 80
years ago. I have here a quotation from the
Department of Reconstruction of Prince Edward
Island where it gives the wage earnings. 1 think
our people should know of it. In the borough of
Queens, 4,045 wage earners. average yearly
earnings each, $720. County of Kings, 1,41l
wage earners, average earnings $419. The point
I want to press home is that apparently confederation has not increased wage earnings
on the Island. Take the fishermen and loggers and average
it up, very few people in Newfoundland, except
those unfortunate enough to have a bad voyage,
make below $419. I know on our part of the coast
the ships' wages for four months in Bay de Verde
and Grates Cove is somewhere around $300, and
the same thing applies to many ships that go to
the Labrador.
Mr. Chairman You are as far from the point as
the sun is from the earth. We are debating section
22. You are telling us about PEI. What possible
908 NATIONAL CONVENTION December 1947
connection is there between that and section 22?
Mr. Bailey Mr. Smallwood brought up the matter of PEI.
Mr. Chairman You have gone astray from the
point. PEI entered into the picture in connection
with communications under section 4.
Mr. Hollett On that point, we were talking about
the surveys of the natural resources of the
province. I take it the whole standard of any
country or any province will depend on the
amount of natural resources?
Mr. Hollett And the living standard. For instance, the salaries of teachers would depend on
the natural resources of the country. I put it to you
that with all these surveys that have been made,
say in PEI, they have not yet been able to raise
the salaries of their teachers to the standard which
we have in Newfoundland now. I was wondering
if that was why the delegation to Ottawa cut
$500,000 off the amount of the teachers, so that
we could get down to the standard of Prince
Edward Island. We are talking about natural
resources. We must relate everything else to
these natural resources.
Mr. Chairman Did I understand you to make
the statement that the educational standard, the
salaries of teachers generally in eastern Canada,
are lower than Newfoundland?
Mr. Hollett The salaries of teachers in PEI are
very much lower than they are in Newfoundland.
If you wish me to prove it, I can.
Mr. Chairman I am not interested in the difficulties of the teaching profession in PEI; I am
interested in PEI only insofar as it may have a
bearing on the correct interpretation of section 22
which is now before the Chair.
Mr. Hollett This economic survey which we are
to get from the experts of Canada is not likely to
tend to raise the standard of living of our people,
if we are to judge by the provinces now existing
in Canada.
Mr. Chairman I quite agree with that. The point
is this, industrially this country may have great
potentialities. Mr. Smallwood tells us PEI never
had any.
Mr. Chairman I understood him to say it should
be regarded as a million dollar farm.
Mr. Smallwood I did not say PEI had no industry; I said there were no natural resources
except soil and fish
Mr. Hollett Before Prince Edward Island went
into confederation she was one of the richest little
countries in the world. She had a huge ship-building industry; a good deal of forestry:
good fishing; a splendid farming trade with the USA — the
most prosperous little country on the Atlantic
seaboard
Mr. Smallwood Mr. Bailey said, and I am
paraphrasing him, this survey, those experts
scouring the island to find out what we have in
the way of natural resources, would that put a
piece of pork in the barrel? Would that create
work and employment? Surely the answer is
simple. How long back in his life can Mr. Bailey
remember hearing stories of our inexhaustible
wealth, our vast natural resources? And it is only
this year, 1947, that any government in
Newfoundland's history has ever brought in a
man to begin to measure how much water-power
we have; there is no known check of our
minerals; no known check of our timber resources.... It is time we found out just
what we
have got. When we have found it out, will that
put an extra pound of pork in the barrel? Yes, for
this reason. We have gone beyond the day when
someone could start a little company with
$10,000 or $15,000, get a grant of a piece of land
supposed to contain a mine, and then go out and
sell the mine for a million dollars. Today you
have to know exactly what you have before capital will show any interest. Let someone
show
what Newfoundland has, and if we are a province
of Canada, and it is found out officially, definite
data can be printed and published as to what we
have, and there is capital in Canada, the United
States and even in Britain to capitalise every last
little ounce of the natural resources we have. That
is why we need this economic survey. Let us find
out what resources we have here....
Mr. Cashin In connection with mining in
Canada, Mr. Smallwood, was it through the efforts of the Canadian government that
the outstanding gold mines of Canada were brought
about?
Mr. Smallwood I will answer in my own way.
I will not answer "yes" or "no". I will not be
forced into it.
Mr. Cashin Let us take the Lakeshore. That was
December 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 909
discovered by Harry Oakes, a gold mining
prospector who came up from the States many
years ago. He prospected in Alaska, came into
Ontario and what happened? He was trying to
beat his way from Toronto to Montreal and was
thrown off the train by the conductor. He fell in
with a Chinaman and he discovered the
Lakeshore. That is one of them. It was the
pioneers in Canada who discovered its wealth.
The government probably assisted them later on.
They did it here. They do it everywhere. Let us
look at Hollinger mine — the one that is owned
by Timmins. What happened? Hollinger controls
probably the biggest gold mine in the world,
founded by Benny Hollinger, staked by McMartin. The government had nothing to do with
that. As far as mining is concerned, you have to
have the pioneer spirit, the men to go out in the
wilds. Someone went to the Labrador and found
the ore, the government did not find it. The same
thing applies to forestry. The government did not
know what timber was on Crown lands. They
give us some idea.
Mr. Cashin In Canada they do not know what
they have.
Mr. Cashin Go down to Quebec, and they cannot tell you, or to British Columbia. In Vancouver,
I was there 40 years ago, they do not
know what they have there yet. It is being discovered every day.... As far as the
Government
of Canada coming down here is concerned, our
people have to do it themselves. We have to get
over the idea, whether we have confederation, or
under Commission government or under responsible government or any other form of government,
that if we are not prepared to pioneer and
work ourselves, no government is going to feed
us. Someone has to pay for it and it is generally
the taxpayer. Whilst we appreciate the Canadian
government's proposals — that is why I have
sympathy with Mr. Smallwood here and it is
unusual for me to say that — he is acting on
behalf of the Canadian government. He is telling
us what the Canadian government says — he has
no more idea than I have....
Mr. Cashin If I am unfair, that is the unfortunate
position he is in; he is answering questions on
behalf of the Canadian government.
Mr. Chairman He has been repeatedly under
fire answering questions and giving interpretations. He has given interpretations
as best he can;
you may or may not accept his interpretations but
that does not alter the fact that he gives an honest
interpretation and in many cases he has been
supported. For example, if I am in a courtroom
giving an interpretation of some act, it is not fair
to say I am the lawful agent of that legislature
because I am giving an interpretation.
Mr. Cashin We are wasting a lot of time. The
same thing has applied to every chairman of
every committee; he automatically became a
minister of the Crown.
Mr. Cashin As chairman of the Finance Committee, I became finance minister overnight;
same thing with the Economic Report and the
other reports. We had questions fired at us, all of
us.
Mr. Chairman You have been chairman of two
reports since I have occupied this office, and I
agree with what you say. But I suggest it is not
only highly improper, but highly unfair. If you as
a minister of the Crown had access to the information required, then there would be
every
reason to ask those questions.
Mr. Cashin That is why I say we are wasting a
lot of time and not trying to finish up. I am not
trying to close off the debate. We know the
Canadian government may or may not come
down; they have not given us any undertaking
they will. It is not in the terms.
Mr. Smallwood They say that automatically
they will come, if we go into confederation.
Mr. Chairman I would like to repeat that the
procedure employed by Mr. Smallwood was ordained by this House before we went into
committee of the whole at all. He was a member of
the Ottawa delegation. He has been requested,
and it becomes his duty while he remains as he
is, to read and interpret the clause, and to answer
any questions on the clause. It is the right of
members to be satisfied or dissatisfied with his
interpretation or any answers on questions addressed to him arising out of his interpretation.
But I do not think, in fairness to him, it is fair to
say because he is simply discharging a duty. he
is acting as an agent....
Mr. Bailey Mr. Chairman, in regards to this
fairness probably I did not make myself clear....
910 NATIONAL CONVENTION December 1947
We don't want to put a fancy picture before our
people of what is going to be, because our people
are looking to this.
Mr. Chairman It is not a question of a fancy
picture at all. It is important or relatively unimportant as far as members are concerned,
and
every man is entitled to draw his own conclusions. Mr. Smallwood thinks it is important,
other members think otherwise, and I am not
prepared to say who is right and who is wrong.
Mr. Bailey Mr. Chairman, I think it
is important.
If we were in a position tomorrow to spend $50
million on the survey of this country, I think it
would be one of the most important things in our
history.... If we got the money, go ahead, but let
our people understand that it is the province that
would be going ahead, and these people are going
to help. Now if the federal government promised
to come down here and put in a survey, then we
know what we are talking about.
Mr. Bailey I don't see it. I don't see where the
federal government is going to pay a dollar on
this...
Mr. Chairman There is no point in arguing it.
It is a question of interpretation...
Mr. Bailey If they intend to do it why don't they
say, "We will bear the cost"?
Mr. Chairman Well, they do say it, in my
opinion; but you are entitled to your own opinion.
[The reporter was unable to record the next
passage of the debate, since the Chairman, Mr.
Bailey and Mr. Smallwood were all talking at
once.]
Mr. Smallwood ....There is one simple little
thing Canada could do, and if we could afford it
we could do it for ourselves, and that's this survey
that Mr. Bailey spoke about. And this method
which I have never heard of before, of two ships
with a wire strung between them, scraping the
bottom with other wires, and showing where the
shoals and fishing grounds are; that might be
worth untold millions of dollars to Newfoundland. I am sure that Mr. Bailey will agree
with that. That is included in this economic survey.
Mr. Hollett That has been done long ago. I don't
believe there is a fisherman who does not know
where every shoal that exists is situated.
Mr. Hollett I am not sure that Captain Bailey
knows much about deep-sea fishing around Newfoundland. The only reason I am saying
a few
words on this clause is this: Mr. Smallwood said
that in his opinion this was the most important
section in this Grey Book, and I want to point out
that survey has been in operation in Canada for
70 or less years, and we know the results in
Canada. What can we expect from this idea of
confederation if this is the most important section? lf nothing better has been done
in PEI if you
like, or Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan, if nothing
better has restulted from these surveys, then why
is this the most important section in this book?
Mr. Chairman It is the most important section
because Mr. Smallwood says so, but it may have
no importance at all so far as you or I are concerned.
Mr. Butt On the question of an economic survey, I certainly agree with Mr. Smallwood. What
I was trying to find out from reading section 22
is how far the public services of Canada would
be of assistance in bringing about a proper
economic and financial survey of Newfoundland
as well.
Mr. Butt No, I know they don't, but I think that
is something necessary to be done. I raised some
doubt the time before when the public services
sections were read, those public services which
would apply to Newfoundland. I am sorry this
debate came up this afternoon because I have
been making a survey of these services, and this
afternoon I am only going to refer to one section,
and that comes under the Public Health and Welfare Department. There are 17 services
enumerated there. Four of those are treated here
separately, all of them relating to financial
benefits of one kind or other. They are: the treatment of sick and injured mariners;
old age pensions; pensions for the blind; family allowances.
Eight of these services are purely consulting services. Eight of them. The balance
are like this:
food and drug standards; investigation and research; industrial health; national physical
fitness
programme.
Now the point that I would like to make, and
December 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 911
I would like to see this gone into very carefully,
is this: ... that out of these 17 services, four are
referred to here because they will affect the
province in a financial way. Eight of them are, as
the Director of Medical Services knows, consulting services. We have never been refused
any
information of any kind that any of the civil
service departments wanted from the Dominion
government at any time, and that service is available to Newfoundland. I make this
as a flat statement, and if anyone can correct that, then I will
apologise, but I think I am on fairly safe ground,
because I have made a fairly reliable survey of it.
Now, Mr. Smallwood wanted to know
whether the province had paid anything under
any one of these services. The National Physical
Fitness Programme. There is some incongruity in
talking of a physical fitness programme when we
are talking about an economic survey, but I am
giving this as an example. You will find on page
93 of the Black Book:
The National Physical Fitness Programme
provides for the establishment of a National
Council on Physical Fitness, on which the
provincial governments have representatives. Financial assistance is given to
any province that has signed an agreement
with the Dominion Government as provided
in the Act. Within the limits of the National
Physical Fitness Fund, set up in the consolidated Revenue Fund for the purpose, the
Dominion Government undertakes to pay
one dollar for every dollar a province spends
on its program ... etc., etc.
Now this is one case in which the Dominion
government only assists in carrying out one of the
services mentioned, and what is worrying me is
just how far these public services, and this particular survey, will mean something
to Newfoundland. I believe that we will make progress
by the things which are found, as Major Cashin
has pointed out, and by the things which are
deliberately organised by a government or by a
great concern; but I express this as a matter of
opinion. Having said that I believe firmly in an
economic survey, I question if that survey of
Newfoundland should not be done by people
partly from Newfoundland, Canada, the United
States, one at least from New Zealand, and from
the Scandinavian countries. In that way I think
we would get a much better idea of the economic
potentialities of Newfoundland than by having it
done by the ordinary administrative servants of
the Dominion of Canada.
Mr. Chairman If it is the pleasure of the House
we shall proceed to read the next section.
Suitable provision will be made in the
formal instrument of union or in other appropriate legislation for the following:
(1) The extension of Canadian citizenship to the people of Newfoundland;
(2) The continuation of Newfoundland
laws, courts, commissions, authorities, etc.,
until altered by the appropriate authority:
(3) The first constitution of the Province
of Newfoundland, in accordance with the
wishes of the appropriate Newfoundland
authorities and subject to the provisions of
the British North America Acts, 1867 to
1946, which are applicable to provincial constitutions generally;
(4) The retention by Newfoundland of its
natural resources on the same basis as other
provinces;
(5) The application to the Province of
Newfoundland of the British North America
Acts, 1867 to 1946 (except as otherwise
provided in the terms of union), and of the
federal laws of Canada.
Sir, on these five paragraphs I have not much
to say. The extension of Canadian citizenship to
the people of Newfoundland is not a matter of
utmost importance. You know the very recent
trend within the British Commonwealth. The
people of Australia are becoming Australian
citizens, of South Africa, South African citizens,
and of Canada, Canadian citizens. One of the
reasons is that up to now we have all been British
subjects. Of course we have been and we will
always be British subjects; but in addition we
become citizens of England, or Canada, or
Australia; citizens of the dominion in which we
live.
On the second one, Newfoundland laws,
courts, etc. .... I don't think that there is anything
much that calls for comment in that.
"The first constitution of the Province of Newfoundland, in accordance with the wishes
of the
appropriate Newfoundland authorities...applicable to provincial constitutions generally."
Now on that I think I ought to point out that the
912 NATIONAL CONVENTION December 1947
constitution of a province is a matter for that
province. We often hear the question, "Under
confederation, how many members would Newfoundland elect to the House of Assembly?"
You
often hear the question, "Would there be two
houses?" "Would it be 'bicameral', or
'unicameral'?" "Would there be a lower house
and an upper house?" Then again you often hear,
"How many districts would there be?" All these
matters are in the provincial constitution of Newfoundland if we become a province,
and we are
the masters. We decide for ourselves whether our
general elections shall be every four years, or five
or six; whether our House of Assembly shall
consist of 15 members of 50, or anything between. We decide whether we shall have
an upper
house or just an elected house. All these matters
are our own business.... The only thing is that
those portions of the BNA Act which are common to the provinces generally would also
be
common to the Province of Newfoundland.
On no. 4 there is not much to say. Newfoundland would hold on to its own natural
resources. On no.5, the BNA Act would apply to
Newfoundland as it does to all provinces, except
that there are certain places in these terms where
we are exempted from particular provisions of
the act....
Mr. Cashin "The extension of Canadian
citizenship to the people of Newfoundland." I
take it now we change our name from Newfoundlanders to Canadians.
Mr. Smallwood No, no, any more than the
people of Prince Edward Island will ever cease
to be Islanders. The people of Nova Scotia are
Canadians, yes, but also Nova Scotians. We will
always be Newfoundlanders, not only in name
but in truth, even if we are Canadians.
Mr. Cashin We have several agreements with
various corporations. For instance we have one
agreement with the Newfoundland-Labrador
Mining and Development and Exploration Company, which states that Newfoundlanders
will be
given preference in employment. The same applies at Corner Brook and Grand Falls,
Buchans,
etc. Once we become a province of Canada there
is nothing to stop what we call, at the present
time, a Canadian coming in and getting work
there just on the same basis as a Newfoundlander. Would there?
Mr. Smallwood Yes, the contracts made be
tween the Government of Newfoundland and any
corporations bearing on taxation, or bearing on
conditions under which they were given any concessions or contracts, those would stand.
Even
Bowaters will still only pay $150,000 a year
income tax, although other corporations will pay
according to the Canadian corporation income
tax. Any contracts which the Newfoundland
government has made up to the moment we become a province will stand.
Mr. Cashin I quite appreciate that question of
taxation, but in connection with those who are to
be employed — there is nothing in here to say it
will apply.
Mr. Cashin But if I am living in Quebec there
is nothing to stop me from going up in Ontario,
and I have just as much right to get a job up there
as any fellow that lives in Toronto.
Mr. Cashin Well, there would be nothing to
prevent a man who lived in the Newfoundland
end of Labrador now, even though we have legislation to give Newfoundlanders preference
for
the work that's there. When we become a
province of Canada men from British Columbia
for that matter, can come in on our own bases.
Mr. Smallwood No ... Newfoundlanders had a
government since 1825. Ever since then Newfoundland has had a government under various
forms. We have one now, and we will have one
up to the day we become a province, if we become a province. These various governments
have made various contracts, and these contracts
stand. If you like to put a question to the Government of Canada, and are not prepared
to take my
word, put a question to the Government of
Canada. That will settle it.
Mr. Chairman Major Cashin's point is whether or not there are any immigration restrictions
between provinces.
Mr. Smallwood Immigration is a concurrent
jurisdiction. It is both federal and provincial. It is
concurrent.
Mr. Cashin There's nothing to stop me, if I am
living in Montreal, from going to British Columbia if I want to.
Mr. Smallwood Well no, there is not, but there
could be. It is concurrent.
Mr. Cashin "The continuation of Newfoundland laws...until altered by the appropriate
December 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 913
authority." Who is that going to be?
Mr. Smallwood How could the Government of
Canada say that?.... That's for us to determine,
not them. They can't name the authority.
Mr. Cashin Well, who are we going to name?
That's up to the future government.
Mr. Smallwood The government that you and I
are going to be in next year together.
Mr. Chairman The constitution of courts both
civil and criminal, and the regulation of civil
procedure is a matter entirely for the province,
but the matter of criminal law, which is reflected
in the criminal code of Canada is decided by the
federal government.
Mr. Cashin I must apologise, Mr. Chairman. I
was not there the first couple of days that this thing
was being discussed, but assuming that tomorrow
Newfoundland voted to go into confederation
who is going to finalise that deal?
Mr. Cashin Who is going to finalise it, is it the
British government, or who is it? I want to know.
Mr. Smallwood I am itching to answer that, but
I won't. It is getting a little late, and we have
another clause. We have to go back to veterans
and merchant seamen, you see, and we should
finish that, it is only a matter of reading it. But
this matter that Major Cashin raises did come up
and we had quite a little discussion on it here on
the second or third day. He was not in the House.
I would suggest that he hold that over until we
come to it. We will come back to it again. It is a
very interesting subject and quite important, and
we should come back to it again.
Mr. Jackman Would the Quebec fishermen be
permitted to fish on the French Shore or
Labrador?
Mr. Smallwood That is a matter for future
decision. Immigration is concurrent. Both the
federal government and each provincial government has ideas on that. We would be a
province,
with a provincial government. That provincial
government would have authority for that.
Mr. Fudge Getting back to those contracts
which Mr. Smallwood refers to, namely
Bowaters, which he claims pays $150,000 a year
in taxes, which is correct we are told. This will
not be changed. I presume that many other contracts that exist at the present time,
if we should
go into confederation, will also not be changed.
That is what I understood him to say. Then isn't
it reasonable to assume that the contracts made
on behalf of the British government and the
Americans in connection with their bases will
remain also?
Mr. Chairman You are getting into very deep
water there, Mr. Fudge.
Mr. Fudge Well, if one is a contract so is the
other.
Mr. Chairman It all depends, I don't want to
express an opinion on that.
Mr. Hollett I did not hear quite what Mr. Fudge
said. I gathered it was something about the bases
deal. Is that right?
Mr. Fudge ....Mr. Smallwood tells us the
Bowater contract would remain the same if we
went into confederation, and the point I raised
was that I presume the contracts made between
the British government for the base deals with the
United States would remain also. It's a contract.
Mr. Hollett That is a very important point, and
one I was going to raise myself.
Mr. Chairman For whom? You are raising the
point to be dealt with by whom?
Mr. Hollett The point is this: the British government signed a contract.
Mr. Chairman I am not interested in that at all.
It is not competent for this House to even deal
with it. The whole thing is
ultra vires, and I don't
want to hear anything about it.
Mr. Hollett Mr. Chairman, I shall mention
something which is not
ultra vires, which is a
letter written by Winston Churchill in which he
stated...
Mr. Chairman I am ruling on a point of law,
and there is no appeal from this Chair on a point
of law, and I rule that the terms of the Convention
Act do not require us to go into that, and I defy
anybody in this chamber or out of it, anybody in
this country, to show me anything in section 3,
which defines and sets forth your duty, which
allows you to review these base deals. Show me
how it becomes
intra vires to this House, and I
will allow you to go on with it.
914 NATIONAL CONVENTION December 1947
Mr. Chairman There is no debate on this point.
I am not ruling on a question of procedure, I am
ruling on a point of law.
Mr. Hollett Mr. Chairman, I did not ask you to
rule on a point of law.
Mr. Chairman I have ruled this as being
ultra
vires, and I hope I won't have to do it again.
Mr. Cashin There is a point of law here. Coming back to the Labrador Exploration thing again.
It says the company shall employ Newfoundland
workmen, provided they shall be available. If
Newfoundland enters union with Canada, and
Newfoundlanders become Canadians, does this
point stand in law?
Mr. Chairman If the House ... of course, I am
not going to be here when you decide it. I am not
prepared to recognise this House as a court of
judicature, or having any jurisdiction whatever to
pronounce upon a point of law. Why the whole
thing is becoming absurd — too ridiculous for
anything.
Mr. Chairman I decided this point of law: it is
for me to decide as a Chairman whether any man
is
intra vires or
ultra vires.... I am not sitting here
as a senior partner of McEvoy and Lewis, I am
sitting here as Chairman of this Convention.
Mr. Cashin Well, I will ask Mr. Smallwood.
Does this proviso stand in law?
Mr. Smallwood I am not a lawyer, and it is a bit
ridiculous for me to give an opinion on a matter
of law, but I will give you an opinion for what it
is worth — a cent and a half, and the cent is
plugged. It is not even worth a cent and a half,
but I will say this: the contracts we have with
corporations stand.
Mr. Cashin Yes, as far as the corporations are
concerned.
Mr. Smallwood No, as far as the Government
of Newfoundland is concerned.
Mr. Cashin Well, Mr. Chairman. in order to get
an answer to this question I will have to address
a question to the Department of Justice.
Mr. Chairman I am afraid you will. That is the
proper procedure.
Mr. Cashin Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. I will
probably be told it is none of my business.
Mr. Chairman I am sorry. I don't defend the
Department of Justice. I am not the Department
of Justice. If you will table your question we will
endeavour to have it answered.
Mr. Smallwood Mr. Chairman, it is now 5.30,
and if the House has indulgence enough we could
finish this final clause. Would that be all right?
Mr. Reddy Regarding Labrador. If Newfoundland-Labrador develops into such a great
mine as we think it will be, is there anything to
prevent Newfoundland being flooded by French
Canadians, taking the work from Newfoundlanders?
Mr. Smallwood We just answered that question
twice, once to Mr. Cashin and once to Mr. Jackman. If Mr. Reddy does not agree with
my answer
I can't help it. The answer is, "No".
Mr. Reddy That is not true. There is nothing in
God's world to prevent French Canadians from
entering Labrador if there is work there, if we
become a province of Canada.
Mr. Smallwood Would Mr. Reddy be kind
enough to give his reasons. That's a very
categorical statement.... Mr. Reddy says there is
nothing to stop the French Canadians, millions of
them, from flocking into Labrador if we become
a province. He ought to have some reason for that
statement.
Mr. Reddy Mr. Chairman, is there anything to
prevent a man from Sydney going to work in
Saskatchewan?
Mr. Reddy Well then, why can't they come in
here? It will be all the same if we become a
province.
Mr. Chairman Your opinion is predicated upon
the ease with which people can move from one
province to another now, so that if we become a
province you said...
Mr. Cashin I have been in every province in
Canada, from the Atlantic to the Pacific and there
is no bar on the borderline, anyone can go right
through. I have been from Vancouver Island to
Newfoundland, not once but many times. They
never even question it.
Mr. Smallwood But here you are up against the
position where Newfoundland, as a province,
enters with its contracts made with corporations,
including the Labrador Mining and Exploration
Company. That contract either stands or it does
not. Now, why not direct a question to the
December 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 915
Government of Canada?
Mr. Chairman I have had to rule my friend Mr.
Hollett out of order, and I have had to do the same
thing with Major Cashin, but you are getting
pretty far afield now, as to whether or not, for
example, Bowaters or the AND Company would
have the right to take in residents from some part
of Canada in lieu of Newfoundlanders, bearing in
mind the fact that in becoming the tenth province
Newfoundland becomes a part of Canada. I want
to say ... that we are getting very far afield.
Mr. Chairman This Convention should not be
improperly placed in the position where it has to
make pronouncements upon far-reaching points
of law, or where I am called upon to express an
opinion upon a point of law; which I don't have
to do, except insofar as it concerns the interpretation of the Convention Act....
I think, Major
Cashin, the point by you is well taken, that is,
address your questions on legal points to the
Department of Justice in this country or in
Canada, consistent with our practice in submitting various other questions to various
other
departments of government.
Mr. Fudge ....As far as this employment of
French Canadians on the Labrador — I have
asked in a good many cases, where we have
signed agreements with employers, that
preference be given to people who reside in the
area. However, before we get the number of
employees required, people from all over the
island have flocked in and have been hired.
Similarly, if there is work down there, the
Canadians will have their men there before we
get the message. It is a waste of time to discuss
it.
Mr. Chairman To get a clear-cut answer to the
questions raised by Major Cashin, which I consider to be of far-reaching importance,
the only
thing to do is to address a series of questions
calculated to determine whether there are existing contracts, and whether Newfoundlanders
are
to be employed in the event of the constitutional
status of the country being altered.
Mr. Miller If we take measures to keep these
workmen out of Labrador, it would be a poor
basis to start off on. All the other provinces might
set up laws to keep Newfoundlanders out of the
other parts of Canada. If we start out by saying,
"You cannot work in our province — keep out".
they can put up a poster in any other province to
the same effect.
Mr. Chairman Discrimination almost invariably and inevitably provokes retaliation.
Mr. Bailey I do not believe any law or anything
else can keep them out. If we have confederation,
we are Canadians and they are Canadians.
Mr. Chairman In view of the fact that Major
Cashin is going to table a question on that point,
we are putting the cart before the horse.
[The committee rose and reported progress, and
the Convention adjourned]
