Nova Scotia Legislative Assembly, 12 April 1866, Nova Scotia Confederation with Canada.


THURSDAY, April 12, 1866

The house met at 3 o'clock.


Upon the motion to take up the order of the day, Mr. ANNAND asked that the debate be deferred in consequence of the arrival of the mail steamer from England, which had brought him important correspondence requiring immediate reply.
HON. PROV. SEC. replied that the Government were desirous of pressing the matter to a conclusion, as the Session had far advanced. It was well known that gentlemen opposite desired delay for the purpose of creating an agitation of the most discreditable kind.
Mr. S. CAMPBELL supported the proposition 226 DEBATES AND PROCEEDINGS for an adjournment of the debate.
Mr. MILLER called attention to the fact that the Morning Chronicle, in publishing his recent Speech on this question, had omitted a considerable portion of it. It was of great importance that this debate should be fairly sent to the country, and he trusted that the paper referred to would receive no portion of the grant for publishing the debates, unless this matter was remedied.
Mr. ANNAND said he was not aware of the circumstance until that moment. He should be ashamed if any one in his employ could be guilty of the act intentionally. He would request that the Committee on Reporting and Printing investigate the matter. He did not see why the debate should be thus forced on. Some time ago he had asked the Government to define their policy on the question, and the answer given was, that they had no policy until after New Brunswick had taken action. It would be impossible for him to remain in the house that afternoon.
Hon. PROV. SEC. said that no one could say that justice had not been done to the hon. gentleman in this debate—as to courtesy, he, Mr. Annand, was entitled to none, for he had been representing a majority of the house as corrupt and venal. He, Pro. Secy., was not prepared to accept the statement that private business interfered with Mr. Annand's attendance, for that gentleman had spent the morning in the streets, and had made no secret of his intention to postpone the debate.
Mr. ANNAND rose to reply; but upon interrupions coming from the galleries, Mr. S. Campbell said he "saw strangers in the galleries," whereupon they were cleared.


When the galleries were re-opened, Hon. PRO. SEC. laid on the table a copy of a despatch relating to the assumption of the government of Nova Scotia by Sir F. W. Williams.
Also a copy of a proclamation relating to Sanitary and Quarantine regulations.  
Hon. ATTY. GEN. introduced a bill relating to treason and seditious practices. The bill, he said, was a copy of the 11th and 12th Victoria.


The adjourned debate on the bill to repeal the act relating to the Presbyterian Church of the Lower Provinces, was resumed.
Mr. ROSS said: He was once told that a man who changed his politics more than once was a very doubtful character—but the man who twice changed his religion, was not to be trusted. His colleague had shifted his course so often in politics and religion, that it would be hard to find a place for him, and even in the census he had been compelled to put himself down as belonging to the Church of Scotland. That gentleman had not dealt honestly with the house in making some statements, when it was known that years ago before the union took place, he left the Free Church for reasons well known to the people of Victoria, and with which he did not think it [...]
[...] Mr. ARCHIBALD asked what would be thought if two sections of any denomination agreed to unite and the House resolved that they should not do so? That was the position of this case; not a man connected with the united body had voted for the bill excepting the Attorney General who was the counsel of the claimants. The rule which the House had just laid down would, if applied to some other churches, rend them to the foundation.
Mr. C. J. CAMPBELL said he wanted nothing more than the strong expressions and threats of Mr. Archibald to convince the house that the bill would pass. It seemed as if that gentleman could not get sufficiently strong terms of abuse to apply to him, Mr. C., and the Inspector of Schools. For his part he was content that the hon. gentleman should abuse him, for such abuse did not affect him in the smallest degree. He had understood the hon. gentleman to threaten the house with a Presbyterian ascendency — that showed that the union was merely for party purposes. What matter was it to the house what Church, he Mr. C., belonged to? 300 persons had petitioned and had declared and shown that their proty had been taken from them. He himself had seen the cemeteries referred to locked. The bill would not take a penny from the united body, its object was to repeal an obnoxious clause which gave them property that they never paid for. He came there to represent his constituency, and to state the claims of any parties putting them in his hands, and did not care how many were opposed to him if he was right. He felt himself hardly equal to the task of combatting gentlemen on the other side with all their ability, for he could with difficulty speak the English language, but the remarks of Mr. Archibald showed that this was the greatest defeat of that gentleman's public life. That gentleman must have felt the strength of the case laid before the house, when he had declined the challenge to argue out the question, and had been ashamed to further his own progeny , being obliged to get another member, the hon. member for Inverness, to do the dirty work.
Mr. BLANCHARD said it was very seldom that any member even condescended to such ungentlemanly, indecent and contemptible vituperation as that which had just been heard. Nothing better, however, was to be expected from the hon. member for Victoria. That gentleman had said that he could not speak the English language—that had been abundantly proved, and the words he used were only fit for the arena of the fish market. The next time he spoke as he had done he would receive a still more severe reply.
Mr. BLANCHARD then withdrew his notice of motion to rescind, on the understanding that the bill would be again opposed on the motion for the second reading.


HON PROV SEC'Y laid on the table the Report of the Fruit Growers' Association.
Also a petition in favour of assessment for support of schools.
Mr. ARCHIBALD presented a petition for the establishment of a new post road in Colchester county.
Mr. BLACKWOOD presented a petition from Commissioners and Trustees of Stirling district, in reference to a school-house which had been destroyed by fire.
Mr. STEWART CAMPBELL asked the government to lay on the table any correspondence in their possession in reference to the abandonment of the Quebec scheme.
Mr. ARCHIBALD introduced a bill to amend chap 72 of Revised Statutes, respecting Commissioners of Sewers.
The House then adjourned.


Nova Scotia. The Debates and Proceedings of the House of Assembly. Halifax: Croshill and Bourinot, 1864-1867. Digitized by Canadiana.



Selection of input documents and completion of metadata: Dave Lang.

Personnes participantes: