Document Information

Date: 1867-11-08
By: Canada (Parliament)
Citation: Canada, House of Commons Debates, 1st Parl, 1st Sess, 1867 at 10-21.
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).

DEBATE ON THE ADDRESS

The Speaker then put the Address, paragraph by paragraph. On the first paragraph being put, Hon. Mr. Howe rose to speak; but on the suggestion of Mr. Holton, the House took a recess till half-past seven. After the recess.

The Speaker took the chair at half-past seven o’clock.

Joseph Howe [Hants] having had the floor before dinner, resumed the debate on the Address. Before proceeding to discuss the subject before the chair, Mr. Howe alluded to his own position in connection with the leadership of the Opposition, saying that it would have been an act of great impertinence on his part to have assumed the leadership of any body of men holding views with respect to Confederation at variance with his own. It would also have been inconsistent with his duty to his own country. No man in his country went to the hustings pledged to any side of any question in the politics of Canada. No man there concerned himself about the policy of the existing Canadian Government. He felt incapable of assuming leadership in a House where two languages were used, with one of which he was not very familiar. He therefore felt with his peculiar views on Confederation that it was far better for him to take a position in the body of the House. No one from Nova Scotia had any side in the party politics of Canada. They had been legislated into the House against their wills. With these remarks as to his own position he would proceed to the subject before the House, the consideration of His Excellency’s Speech. As a public man of some experience he thought discussion on the speech a mere waste of time, but with respect to the speech now before the House, matter had been introduced which challenged the correctness of the view of the people of Nova Scotia, and, therefore, called upon them for discussion. In addition to His Excellency’s Speech they had had a speech from his honourable friend (Mr. Fisher) who had raised other points, which he (Mr. H.) regretted, as he had long approved of the public course of his honourable friend, the representative of York. His honourable friend had said that party feeling should be laid aside, and it might be laid aside by his honourable friend, but with respect to this House he feared his dream would not be realized. There would be two altars in this House, the worshippers of which would be as far from agreeing as were those at the first two altars erected on this earth-the altars of Cain and Abel. (Laughter). Assuredly Cain would soon be into Abel’s hair, (laughter) and the dream of his honourable friend would be dispelled. His friend hoped there would be no extravagance-he trusted not. He hoped there would not be an army of loafers fastened on the country. He, too, hoped not, but he thought he paid but a poor compliment to the House of the Government with respect to coalition. He also referred to the Intercolonial Railway, but where was the route? That was a New Brunswick question, and when one route had been chosen, as it would have to be, what then would become of the Coalition? He had placed in his hands a speech made by the Minister of Public Works, in which it had been said that the Government of Sir John A.

[Page 11]

Macdonald would have $15,000,000 to expend on their road and would use it to keep themselves in power for ten years. That he thought would be as long as the Coalition would last. With respect to the gratification expressed by His Excellency, it would not be shared by the people of his Province. They felt that they had been in a manner legislated out of the Empire, by being legislated into this Dominion, and they would read His Excellency’s speech with sorrow and humiliation, and not gratification. (Hear, hear). He was in the House of Lords when the Act of Confederation was passed, and though that body consists of 400 members there were only ten members present at the third reading. If this had been a small matter affecting the slightest interest of one Peer of the realm there would have been a commission, or a committee of inquiry before Legislation had been allowed to pass. With respect to the House of Commons, though the members did attend in their places the question was not discussed. Men like John Stuart Mill, who had studied subject of Government nearly all their lives, might have come down with their views on this subject, but the House of Commons had not given the attention it deserved. The House owed it to the Empire, it owed it to the North American Colonies, that a full investigation should have been made before the measure was passed, and perhaps amendments might have been introduced that would have rendered it acceptable. One member of the House of Commons had actually stated that the question had been discussed at every hustings in Nova Scotia, a statement which the people of Nova Scotia had shown to be utterly untrue. The bill had passed in the face of a petition of 31,000 of the people of N.S.-more than half the militia population of the Province. They did not even ask to throw out the bull, but merely to delay it until the Nova Scotians had time to pronounce upon it at the hustings. There was, therefore, on the part of Nova Scotia certainly no room for congratulation for the manner in which it had been treated by the Mother Country. Then this new nation, as it is called, we are told, is soon to be extended from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Weil, perhaps so. But as a nation it had some wants -some weakness-which it would have to remedy. It had no army to defend it, no navy to protect its shipping, but the latter he supposed was to be done by the Minister of Marine, recently appointed, and Commodore Fortin’s ironclad, which he had never yet seen. (laughter.) It had been stated when the new Privy Council of the Dominion was announced, that there was also to be a Secretary of Foreign Affairs; and it had amused him much to consider what were to have been the duties of this Minister, whether to consult with Lord Stanley, and assist him in directing the foreign policy of the Empire (laughter), but this idea of a foreign minister after a week’s ridicule had been abandoned. No doubt the Minister of Militia would do some- thing toward providing for this new nation, and it had been one of the great objections of Nova Scotians to this Dominion scheme that the Minister of Militia might march their young men out of their own country to defend a corner of the earth hundreds of miles away from them. We were asked to annex the Red River Territory to this Dominion. What had been the policy of the British Government in respect to this territory? Why, while for the last fifty years she has been pouring out her population to enrich foreign countries, she has allowed this territory to remain a disgrace to herself and a disgrace to civilization. Well may she hand over this territory to us, and be glad to be rid of the burden. He doubted not but that every man in Canada; every man in all the Provinces would defend the British flag, but with respect to Red River settlement, more men could be recruited in the State of Minnesota in a week than would be necessary to cut it off in spite of ail that Canada could do. Passing from the Hudson’s Bay territory there is British Columbia, which might have been made something as a British colony before it was flanked on both sides by the United States, but with California on one side, and the newly acquired possessions of the Republic, what hope had they of being able to maintain it? All the colonies had room enough for ten times their present population, and the acquisition of more territory would only be a source of weakness. His Excellency had also referred to the Ministers of the Empire having pressed Union on while the details of the scheme had been left with the colonies. Ministers of the Empire were quite right in pressing any question that in their judgment was in the interest of the Empire. But how was this Confederation carried in New Brunswick? In that Province there was not a man who was not strictly loyal to the Crown of England, and there the feeling of loyalty had been played upon. The people were told that the Queen desired Confederation: the Queen’s name was introduced as a reason for its acceptance, and against every man who opposed it, the cry of traitor and

[Page 12]

annexation was raised. (Hear, hear.) He remembered that twenty-five years ago he had occupied the honourable position of Speaker of the Parliament of his own country, and he knew then that it would have been his duty to repress any member who might invoke the name of the Queen, or the Queen’s representative, as an argument for the adoption of any measure. He had read a few months ago that some one in Canada had said he would like to see Joseph Howe come forward and take the oath of allegiance. He would cast no such imputation as was therein conveyed upon the character of any man in Canada, but could appeal to his conduct in the past to show how far he had been faithful to his obligations to the flag of his country. At a time when the Provinces were threatened he had laid aside his party feeling, as his honourable friend from York now proposed to do, and had offered his services to the leader of the Government. Again during the Crimean war he went to the States as the confidential agent of the empire, and recruited for two months despite the activity of Russian agents, without compromising himself or his Government. He was in Washington again the winter before last, and suggested to the British Minister the probable plans of the Fenians to seize the shipping on the seaboard, and at his suggestion the British squadron was ordered into Nova Scotia waters three months earlier than usual, so that the Fenians were frustrated in their designs. He did not mention this as a boast, for it was only what any loyal New Brunswicker or Canadian would have done. He only mentioned these things in reply to the charge of disloyalty and annexation that had been preferred against him. He did not believe that the people of Nova Scotia would ever be satisfied to submit to an act which had been forced upon them by such unjust and unjustifiable means. What was the Union, but a mere Act of Parliament? A mere Act of Parliament may fairly be criticized, and if bad its repeal may be agitated for; yet this Union Act had been spoken of as something against which it was treason to say a word. What had been all the great reforms effected in England, but the repeal of Acts of Parliament and the substitution of others? His Excellency alludes to the freedom of arranging details which were left to the representatives of the colonies: Why, he had read a thick volume of debates on this very question in the Canadian Parliament, and not a line of detail was altered or amended. It was then declared to have been a treaty, and could not be amended or changed. It was never laid before the people of New Brunswick, consequently no power was given in the arrangement of details; it was never submitted to the people of Nova Scotia. But he might be told that the representatives of the people, meaning the delegates, had had the arrangement of details. On this point he would not speak for Canada or New Brunswick, but as for Nova Scotia, the delegates did not represent the people, but a Legislature which had lost the popular confidence. He might ask what would be the course in the neighbouring Republic, if one State attempted to annex another without the consent of the people. And turning from the Republic to European examples, the Union Act between England and Scotland had been passed, clause by clause, by the Parliament of Scotland, as well as that of England, and so with the Union between Great Britain and Ireland; the Act had been passed, though corruptly, by the Parliament of Ireland. Even when Savoy and Nice were annexed to France, the people were consulted by popular vote, and Venice, though conquered by force, had been allowed the form of a popular expression of consent. It might be said that it was only a form, but they had been defeated by superior force, and had at least the satisfaction of yielding to irresistible power while the humiliation and degradation of Nova Scotians had been that they were deprived of their liberty without the opportunity of striking a blow, that by an intrigue, and not by force of arms, their liberties had been extinguished. Heretofore they had been accustomed to hear of the Union Act as a skeleton, and coming to the measures promised in the speech, he supposed would be the flesh and the skin. Among these measures was one for the reform of the currency. Well, he came from a country which had a sound currency; from a country where there never yet was a bank failure. He could not see how a sound bank could be broken by any Government, and no Government ought to have the power (hear, hear.) Next came the assimilation of Customs, Excise, and Revenue generally. This was a sore subject with the Province of Nova Scotia. For ten years they had had a surplus revenue every year but one. Even supposing the revenue was only raised to fifteen per cent, the Dominion would take away from them about 100,000 sovereigns a year. They would certainly have to pay a larger amount of duties than heretofore, and all they got in return was 80 cents a head-the price of a sheepskin in Nova Scotia. (Laughter). He would not go into

[Page 13]

figures at present, but if they raised the duty to fifteen per cent they would add fifty per cent of a burden upon the commerce of Nova Scotia with the world. This would be a serious blow to the prosperity of his Province, and perhaps it would do little good for Canada, and what the Nova Scotians wanted was that they should be let go. The next subject was that of a uniform postal system. Among his first acts as an Executive Officer, was to communicate with Mr. Lafontaine with respect to postal communication between the Provinces. A conference had been held, and arrangements had been made since, the postal system was placed under Colonial management, whereby a rate of five cents on letters had been established between the Provinces. In Nova Scotia the system had been extended, post offices established in every shire, town, and country village, and way offices on every cross road. But all this was now swept away from the control of Nova Scotia. No poor widow, keeping a forty shilling a year way office can look for appointment or preferment except through the favour of some gentleman in Ottawa. Placed as the representatives of Nova Scotia were, they could not expect to exercise much influence with the Government; there was nothing they could ask from the Government, and nothing which the Government could give that they could honourably accept. After referring to the Intercolonial Railway, and lamenting that the Government of the Dominion had stepped in and taken possession of the railways and public works of Nova Scotia, Mr. Howe referred to the subject of the organization of the militia and defence. Statements had been made through the press of Canada within the past few months, which had created great uneasiness in Nova Scotia. When they were told that every man should be armed they felt that the proposition was a serious one. “The whole people should be armed?” “Armed against whom?” On this continent there was but one possible enemy-and with that one we should be forever at peace. He thought that the urging forward of this measure of Confederation as a menace to the United States, was needlessly to irritate the feelings of those who ought to be on good terms with us. With respect to bankruptcy, he was free to confess that the Nova Scotians had never succeeded in framing a satisfactory law on the subject, and if the Dominion Legislature conferred such a law upon Nova Scotia, so far it will be a good service. With respect to the feelings of the mother country towards this country, what had the London 99038,2 Times said? It had advocated Confederation, and hoped that it would quickly be followed by independence, and Mr. Gladstone had said that the £3,000,000 guarantee for the Intercolonial was a wedding gift. The Provinces were going to be married, and he hoped the troops would soon be recalled. In a word the feeling of the British people was that if these colonies assume the status, they should also assume all the responsibilities of a nation. After alluding to the remaining paragraphs of the speech, Mr. Howe said in conclusion, the mere parchment does not make a Union, the Act of Parliament does not create harmony. The Act might be acceptable to the Canadians, and why not? They obtain a vast seaboard, they extend their limits, and had they done it fairly and honourably no man with a head on his shoulders would have complained. But the people of his own Province had been tricked into this scheme, and he very much regretted that it had not been approached in a manner which might have led to the perfecting of a measure which would have rendered unnecessary such a speech as he had been compelled to make. Though he did not expect to command a great deal of support from the House, and had no desire to waste the time in a needless debate, he stated that he would move one brief amendment, expressing regret that the measure had not been submitted to the people of Nova Scotia before its adoption. With respect to the measures of the Government while holding a seat in that House he would, if he believed them to be good, support them, or if otherwise, oppose them, but he would seek no factious course to delay the proceedings of the House, or provoke acrimonious feelings among the members. Mr. Howe spoke for about an hour and forty minutes, and was listened to with great attention. He made many capital hits, and was warmly applauded on resuming his seat.

Charles Tupper [Cumberland]—Mr. Speaker, no member of this House can regret more sincerely than myself that my honourable friend who has just sat down, occupies a position which prevents his great talent from being made available for the advancement of the common interest of the British North American Provinces now united under one Dominion. All who have listened to the eloquent appeal just made to this House must feel how valuable would be the aid which the honourable member could give in promoting the union and consolidation of our common country at this important era in its history. I, Sir, have from the first hour of my public life been an ardent advocate of

[Page 14]

the Union of British North America under one Government. Whether considered in relation to the position and progress of the whole Confederation or in reference to the Province of Nova Scotia, to which I belong, I have never doubted the advantage of Union. Separated as these Provinces were with divers currencies and hostile tariffs it was impossible that our commerce should ever attain the position that union would open up. The old Province of Canada notwithstanding its immense territory and great natural resources could never attain an important position while for five months in the year it was cut off from access to the ocean, and compelled to communicate with the parent state through a foreign country. The Maritime Provinces below, comparatively small and insignificant, could never hope to occupy a position of influence or importance except in connection with their larger sister Canada. The past history of that Province has exhibited the most striking evidence on that point. My honourable friend who has just addressed you denounced on the floor of our own Parliament the Reciprocity Treaty between British America and the United States, on the ground that while it disposed of our most important commercial interests and ceded away the invaluable fisheries of Nova Scotia the Government of that Province had not even the opportunity afforded them of expressing an opinion on a matter so vitally affecting their interests during the negotiation of that treaty. We have seen the credit of our bonds in the London market impaired by a struggle for power in the Legislature of Canada where we had neither voice or influence. If, therefore, we were in our state of isolation powerless to protect our most material interests which were disposed of without our being able to off er an opinion thereon, I ask my honourable friend if he does not think it was desirable that the views and feelings of our country should be presented in the Parliament of a United British America. No man can look at the geographical position of Nova Scotia without feeling that Province intended that we should form the great highway communication between not only the sister colonies behind us, but also a large portion of the Western States and the European world. Yet my honourable friend knows that after he had laboured with great ability for a quarter of a century to accomplish the construction of an Intercolonial Railway; every effort had failed as it had become perfectly apparent that that great work could only be accomplished by the Union of the two Canadas, and Nova Scotia and New Brunswick under one Government. Not only has this great boon been secured for our Province, but by the construction of the western extension from St. John to Bangor already in progress, Nova Scotia must soon become the direct line of communication between London and New York. It is impossible to examine the geological characteristics of Nova Scotia without seeing that Province has given us all the elements of a great manufacturing industry. To say nothing of our valuable gold mines as a means of attracting population a great portion of our Province is enriched with vast deposits of iron, coal and limestone, the minerals which have made England the emporium of manufactures for the world. Yet with all this mineral wealth it was obvious that without that union which would throw down the barriers of our manufacturing industry, and open up commercial intercourse with our fellow colonists, we must be content largely to forego the great material advantages which nature bas bestowed. Union has now given us a population of 4,000,000 instead of 400,000. My honourable friend has spoken eloquently of the great importance of Immigration as the true source of advancement for a country like ours, but it is apparent to all that United British North America will be in a position to attract population, capital and skill to our country to a far greater extent than would be possible whilst we were separate and isolated communities. He has also described in glowing but not extravagant terms the immense value of the Fisheries of Nova Scotia, yet I ask him if United British North America is unequal to the task of protecting that valuable public domain, how isolation was likely to accomplish such an object? As regards the extension of our commerce it is well known that the ablest writers in all these colonies exhausted their best efforts in a vain effort to extend commercial intercourse between the different Provinces. They failed because free trade involved the principle of Union with one Government which alone could secure a common tariff. If we wish to estimate what free trade with each other will do for us, we have only to look at its effects in other countries. When the thirteen American States obtained their independence their territory was no greater than ours-they had a smaller trade, revenue, and population than British America has today. Their first act was to strike down the hostile tariffs which separated the Provinces, and open their country to unrestricted commercial intercourse from Maine to

[Page 15]

Mexico. The result was that their commerce developed with the utmost rapidity, until they soon became one of the most important commercial countries in the world. Interprovincial Union is no untried experiment. Contrast the condition of the two Canadas before and after the Union. When separated by hostile tariffs and legislating against each other, the trade, revenue, and credit of both Canadas were paralyzed; but from the date of the Union all was changed and the country expanded with the most remarkable rapidity, until it obtained its present advanced position. I have referred to the effect of Union upon the progress and material interests of British America, but I admit frankly that there was one question that far transcended even them in importance, and that was the question of defence. The abrogation of the Reciprocity Treaty notwithstanding the evidence which existed to show that it had been more beneficial to the United States than ourselves indicated a desire to obstruct our trade with a view to induce a desire in these Provinces for a political connection with that country. The Fenian raids upon the Provinces also led to the belief that material aid might be found in British America by those who desired to change our allegiance to the Crown. To ensure the most advantageous commercial intercourse with our American neighbours, and protection from the harassing annoyance and expenditure connected with the mad designs of the Fenians, no better means could be adopted than to show the world that these hitherto isolated Provinces were determined to stand shoulder to shoulder in the maintenance of our connection with the Crown, and those glorious and free British institutions, which it has been our happiness to possess. My honourable friend asks with a sneer where are we to obtain an army and navy, and endeavours to hold the Dominion of Canada up to the world as utterly defenceless, and at the mercy of any power who may wish to bring us beneath their yoke. My answer is that there is a moral strength in our united attitude, which presents four millions of British freemen, devoted in their allegiance to the Crown and country, and prepared to sustain each other in upholding the honour of their common country, which is the best guarantee for peace that we can have. But can my honourable friend be ignorant of the fact that the Imperial Government of Great Britain have pledged themselves to maintain the integrity of this Dominion with the whole power of the Empire against any assault, come from whom it may. Had we been unwise enough to set at defiance the earnest entreaty of the Mother Country to unite our fortunes with each other, that we might be better prepared to assist in maintaining our liberties, we might have had good reason to expect that the aid of that Government, under whose fostering protection we have risen to our present position, might be withdrawn. My honourable friend forgets that as long ago as 1854 he declared that these Provinces could put 500,000 in the field, and unaided by British troops bid defiance of any invader. Now he ridicules the idea of arming the population, and thinks we must fall a helpless prey to any enemy. I have no reason to doubt the entire friendship of the United States. I hope and believe that they will be anxious to resume the most reciprocal and friendly relations with these United Provinces. But sir, I do not think that under any circumstances that country, so recently suffering from a calamitous war, and oppressed by a gigantic debt, would attempt the subjugation of united British America, protected by the mightiest Empire in the world. Having thus, sir, glanced at some of the reasons which have induced me to advocate a union of these Provinces, I will briefly turn your attention to the position of Nova Scotia. I admit frankly that the Union party have been thoroughly and handsomely beaten at the recent general election, but I am happy to be able to relieve this House from the apprehension that an overwhelming majority of the people of that Province are determined to obstruct and break down the Union which has been formed. It is no new thing with us to have sweeping changes on such occasions. Only four years ago my honourable friend notwithstanding his unrivalled popular talents, went to the polls with all the power of the Government, of which he was the head, in his hands, when he was himself beaten in one of his strongholds by a majority of over 500, and 13 only of his supporters out of a House of 55 members were elected. Now, Sir, the Government of which I had the honour to be the leader believed that they owed a higher duty to the country than the maintenance of themselves and their party in power. The measure brought in to extend the railway to Pictou on the St. Lawrence, cost us the support of the Western members, known as the Yarmouth School. The measure providing for the support of schools by direct and compulsory taxation, so obnoxious to all young countries, was sufficient of itself to drive any party from power, and would have swept us aside if the Union had never been

[Page 16]

heard of. The Government were charged by their opponents with having sacrificed the interest of the fishermen to a Canadian policy to issue fishing licences and those who had heard his honourable friend to-night, could form some idea of the effect of his perambulating the country with fierce denunciations of that kind, and with having taxed the bread of the poor man in the interests of Canada, because we believed it impolitic to free their flour from the duty imposed by the repeal of the Reciprocity Treaty. The facts, however, remained that the fishing grounds of Nova Scotia were occupied by the fishermen of the United States on payment of an insignificant charge, and a duty existed on American flour. This House could also imagine the consternation and dread excited in the back settlements of the country by vivid and heartrending pictures drawn by his honourable friend of the youth and manhood of the country being drawn from their homes to protect the interminable line of the Canadian frontier. While the people were told on the one hand that they must resort to direct taxation to sustain the local services of the country, Mr. Howe had everywhere asserted the statement made to-night that the first effect of Confederation would be to increase the indirect taxation of the country 50 per cent. It would no doubt be gratifying to the House to know that the financial position of Nova Scotia was so good, but the Finance Minister, who had to find the money, would show the House that, so far, the Dominion had not made much out of that Province. The truth was, that to complete the public works on her own responsibility she would have been obliged to largely reduce the expenditures for the leading services, or increase her tariff to at least 15 per cent. Then it must not be forgotten that the recent election was run under a franchise created by the Government of my honourable friend, and which came into operation for the first time at the last election. In addition to all this, the Government was obliged just before the dissolution to bring in a new representation bill in order to adapt the Local Constitution to the new state of things under the Union. We were thus compelled to reduce largely the representation of several Counties, an act in itself extremely repulsive to the electors. The popular cry was raised that the Union, irrespective of its merits, had been forced on the people in an arbitrary and unconstitutional manner. I need not in this House, I am sure, defend the mode in which the Union Act was carried by the Imperial Parliament, based upon the action of large majorities in the Legislatures of al the Provinces affected by that Act. Pitt and Peel, and all the most eminent statesmen of England, have in the most unmistakeable terms asserted the right of Parliament to deal with any question, constitutional or otherwise which in their judgment the good of the country demanded. My honourable friend himself and all the leading public men in Nova Scotia, had from time to time recorded their opinion in favour of the colonies being united precisely in the mode adopted in this instance. Yet Unionists and anti-Unionists alike were called upon to denounce the mode as an invasion of their rights, and punish those who carried the measure. Notwithstanding all these advantages in going to the polls, the House will be surprised to learn that my honourable friend Mr. Howe and his supporters, failed to induce one-half of the electors of the Province, to go to the polls and record their votes in their favour! I have made the following calculation up with all the care in my power, and will be glad to submit my figures to the scrutiny of my honourable friend. The Unionists contested all but three counties in the Province. In those three I have given the Unionists one- third and two-thirds to the other side. There are about 47,000 voters in the Province. Of them about 10,000 did not go to the polls at all, and of the remainder about 15,000 voted for the Union candidates and 22,000 for their opponents, giving them a majority of about 7,000 in all. But sir, I am not prepared to admit that a majority of the electors have pronounced against the Union or in favour of its repeal. Nay more sir, I am prepared to show the House that my honourable friend himself, and many of his leading supporters, went to the country pledged to give this Union a fair trial. My honourable friend (Mr. H.) at a large meeting at Mason Hall, at Halifax, previous to the elections, said:

Let us hope that they (the Canadians) will act justly. If they do, we should aid them to work the new system fairly,

and subsequently referring to the pledge then given the honourable gentleman in a letter addressed to the people of Canada on the 18th of June last, over his own signature said:

I, having expressed my determination to bow to the paramount authority of Parliament and try the experiment, am not likely to be deterred by necessary forms, etc.

Mr. Power, one of the members elected to represent the metropolitan constituency of Halifax in this Parliament, gave the following

[Page 17]

pledge to the electors in presence of his leader and colleague Mr. Jones, who also represents the county of Halifax:

I will not detain you longer, but will conclude by saying that if you elect Mr. Jones and myself to the Dominion Parliament the interests of Nova Scotia will not suffer at our hands. We are charged with intending to countenance factious opposition. No such thing. We have certainly given the scheme a conscientious and consistent opposition, but are now disposed, if we should go to Ottawa and find it to work even moderately well, to let it have a fair trial.

The honourable member for Guysboro, who led the opposition to Union in the Nova Scotia Legislature at the last session, on the ground that it had not been submitted to the electors, and who ably advocated those views, too, on subsequent occasions to say on the floor of the House that now that the Imperial Act had become the law of the land, he was prepared to bow to its authority, and give his best aid to carry on the legislation of the country under the new circumstances in which we were placed. While Mr. Campbell who made this statesmanlike and patriotic declaration was returned by acclamation, Mr. Annand who pledged himself to repeal was defeated at the polls. I ask my honourable friend who has blamed the Unionists so severely for acting without the question having been fairly submitted to the people, how he can in the presence of facts like these, use the power he obtained for the purpose of endeavouring to destroy and break down this Union before giving it that fair trial to which he stands pledged before the people. Can my honourable friend expect that the Imperial Parliament who passed this act with a petition against it, signed according to Mr. Annand’s declaration by “about 40,000 petitioners,” break faith with this great Confederation at the instance of representatives who only succeeded in polling about half that number of electors, and upon the pledge that they would give this measure a “fair trial”. No man is in a worse position to urge objections to the mode in which this measure was passed, than the honourable member who has just addressed the House, as it is well known that he spent years in advocating a system of responsible government by which the affairs of the country should be controlled, according to the wishes of the majority of the people’s representatives. What guarantee can my honourable friend give the Imperial Government that the same reaction will not take place in Nova Scotia that was witnessed in New Brunswick, where one year an over- whelming majority of the electors declared against the Union, and the next a still larger majority polled their votes in favour of it. I am not without hope, Mr. Speaker, that my honourable friend will yet reconsider his position on this question, and assume the same statesmanlike and patriotic position which the former opponents of Union representing New Brunswick have taken. I read with great pleasure the manly declaration made by my honourable friend, Mr. Anglin, at Montreal, the other night, a declaration that did honour to the head and the heart of that gentleman -that although he had been conscientiously opposed to the Union, he was now prepared to give his best aid to work it out in the manner best calculated to promote the good of our common country. Sir, I would rejoice to see my honourable friend from Nova Scotia in the same way to assume a position that would enable the country to avail itself of the great ability he possesses. He says that the Government could not give him, or those who act with him, anything that he could honourably accept. It would, of course, be impossible for any Government to strengthen the hand of those who declare their intention to break down the Constitution of the country whenever they obtain the power. But my honourable friend must see that his position renders it equally impossible for him to aid a constitutional opposition in the responsible and important Parliamentary functions that they are called upon to discharge, as nothing would necessarily paralyze an opposition so completely as being associated with parties hostile to the existence of the integrity of the country, and anxious to disintegrate it. Under these circumstances I put it seriously to my honourable friend whether the obligations which he has assumed by taking his seat in this Parliament does not bind him at all events to give that fair trial to the existing institutions of the country, which the electors of Nova Scotia had a right to expect from his declarations previous to the elections. I make these observations from no apprehension that the Union of these Provinces can in the slightest degree be endangered by any course which the honourable member, or those who sustain him, may take, but in order to avert the evil to our common country, and especially to my own Province likely to result from this mischievous agitation for repeal. My honourable friend says that he has been charged with disloyalty. Far be it from me to assail the reputation of any man except upon the clearest evidence, but when the delegates were charged with being traitors to their country, we felt it right to call attention to the striking fact that while not a Fenian, or

[Page 18]

annexationist, or traitor could be found within our ranks, every man of that class openly proclaimed their sympathy with the opponents of Union. Although this Confederation is entirely safe from the assaults of all I cannot be indifferent to the injury that may be inflicted upon us among those, who do not understand the question by such speeches as that delivered by the honourable member for Hants to-night. The avowed hostility to the Union will encourage those who are anxious for our downfall, and the declaration by a member of this House that we are weak and defenceless will invite aggression. No statement could be more unfounded or injurious than the assertion that the Mother Country wishes to get rid of us. It is true that neither in the Lords or Commons of England, whose action on this question has been so severely criticised by my honourable friend, was any attempt made to change the measure as arranged between the representatives of these Provinces and the British Government, but it is well known that no Colonial question ever received more respectful attention at the hands of the statesmen, of the Parliament and the Press of England than was bestowed upon this question of Confederation from the time that it was first brought under their notice until its final consummation. The effect of a settled and permanent condition of public affairs upon capital is well known, and while I feel confident that this agitation will be utterly bootless of any result; it will in the meantime largely prevent the introduction, especially in Nova Scotia, of the population, capital and skill that would otherwise immediately flow in to develop the resources and enrich that section of the Union. I appeal to my honourable friend whether it is patriotic to inflict such injury upon his country. Having made these explanations I feel it would not be right at this late hour to trespass on the indulgence of the House, or I would read a few elegant extracts from the vigorous pen and eloquent tongue of my honourable friend, to show how much more able and eloquent he was when advocating the Union of these Provinces, than since he adopted the unworthy policy of endeavouring to belittle and depreciate his own country. (Loud cries of go on.) I will now briefly notice a few of the criticisms which my honourable friend offered this evening. He complains that the salary assigned to the Governor-General is £10,000 sterling. I think if we contrast the salary formerly given to that high officer before the great step which the Union of the Maritime Provinces has given to the former Colony of Canada, the amount will not be found disproportionate. It must be remembered that this officer is the connecting link with the Crown, and the representative of Majesty in this important part of the Empire, and that we could hardly expect to obtain the services of the leading statesmen of England at any smaller amount. My honourable friend complains of the number of Departments in the Government. It was no doubt necessary in making provision for the proper representation of the different sections of the Confederation to have the thirteen Departments, but I would suggest respectfully to the Honourable Minister of Justice whether in the present peculiar position of Nova Scotia, the able and indefatigable Minister of State for Canada might not be charged with the additional duty of the Secretary of State for the Provinces. The vacancy created by the resignation of the Honourable Minister of Finance might in the same way lead to the consolidation of that Department with those of the able and experienced Ministers of Customs and Excise. I am well assured that Her Majesty’s Government will give these questions the most careful consideration, well knowing that nothing will give greater confidence to the country than a judicious econo- my in the administration of public affairs. My honourable friend now represents our position as utterly defenceless, and treats with ridicule the proposal to arm the militia, yet he ought not to forget the following passage of his speech in our Legislature, so long ago as 1854:

How often have we heard that our republican neighbours were going to overrun the Provinces. They have attempted it once or twice, but have always been beaten out, and I do not hesitate to say that the British Americans, over whom the flag flies, are able to defend every inch of their territory, even though Her Majesty’s troops were withdrawn.

Taking our population at two millions and a half (it is now nearer four millions), every fifth person should be able to draw a trigger, giving 500,000 men capable of bearing arms. Such a force would be powerless as an invading army, but in defence of these Provinces invincible by any force that could be sent from abroad.

The opinions of the honourable member would also appear to have undergone material change since 1863, when in moving a vote of thanks at Halifax to the Hon. McGee for his eloquent advocacy of a Union of the Colonies, he thus urged its great importance on the ground of defence:

He thought a Union should not be delayed till we had drifted into difficulties. How shortsighted were the English statesmen of old who lost them the

[Page 19]

thirteen States, when the difficulty could have been arranged in a month, the horrors, of the revolutionary war prevented, and all our race living at peace and harmony at present without the bickering and animosity which prevail in their midst. Talk of the fall of Quebec being a source of sorrow to the inhabitants of this Province. It would be more. If the St. Lawrence were in the hands of our enemies, we should be compelled ta beg permission ta tear down the British flag. What he wished for Nova Scotia was, that she may be the frontage of a mighty Colony; upon which it may be truly said the sun never set. No man can look upon Halifax and its environs, its harbour, its citadel, and say it was made for this Province alone.

The United States have drifted into a civil war; and we may drift into a tight place, from which it may be difficult to extricate ourselves. The States may assail us; but if we had a railway by which troops could be sent from Quebec or other military stations ta the threatened point, we would be saved.

I trust, sir, that now that we have the moral strength arising from the Union of these Provinces, and the assurance of support in any emergency from the Imperial Government it will not be found necessary to burden our people with any oppressive taxation for defence; but my honourable friend should remember that when he was opposing this Union of the Colonies, he presented a counter scheme for the defence of this country under which all British America would be compelled to pay into the Imperial Treasury for the support of army and navy of England. This enormous taxation far exceeding anything that we can be called upon here to contribute, was to be disbursed under my honourable friend’s scheme, by a Parliament in which Nova Scotia was to have two representatives, and Canada four or five. My honourable friend, who has inspired such dread in the back settlements of Nova Scotia, that the young men would be drafted to protect the helpless people of Ontario and Quebec, proposed to the British Government that in addition to this heavy taxation we should contribute our quota of the army required in any war in which Great Britain might be engaged. By duly balancing the route of the Intercolonial, my honourable friend seems to think the Government may retain power for the next ten years. If this be the case as that question mainly affects the Maritime Provinces, we must after all possess some influence in this Parliament. In complaining of the mode in which the Union measure passed the House of Commons, it was stated that the Commons was influenced by an untruthful statement made by an honourable member of that body. As this refers to Mr. Watkin’s remark that Confederation was made an issue at the polls at the last election, I am glad to have the opportunity to make an explanation. When Mr. Bright asserted that this question of Union had not been before the people in Nova Scotia, Mr. Watkin left his seat, and came over to the part of the House where I was sitting near the Hon. Mr. Galt, who remembers well the circumstances. Mr. Watkin said: “Dr. Tupper, I wish to speak to you,” and I went with him some distance to the side of the room. He then said: “What is your answer to Mr. Bright’s statement, that this question has never been before the people?” I said: “The answer is this: In 1861 Mr. Howe, when leader of the Government, moved a resolution in favour of the Union of the Provinces, which passed the Assembly unanimously. That previously to the last general election I had publicly advocated such a Union as has now been agreed upon, and that I was brought into power, and this measure had been carried by a large majority of the present Parliament.” Mr. Watkin knowing that this question was now one of controversy supposed that it had been made an issue at the polls as would undoubtedly have been the case, only that we were all unanimous upon the question at that time. I turned to Mr. Galt during Mr. Watkin’s speech, and remarked how difficult it was to make parties understand, when they were not familiar with the history of a question. Had I wished to mislead Mr. Watkin, I would not have dared to do so, as I had placed in his hands a published history of the whole question in Nova Scotia, which showed that it had never been made an issue at the polls. This House will I am sure exonerate Mr. Watkin from any intentional misrepresentation. My honourable friend takes particular exception to that portion of the speech, which indicates a desire for the Western extension. This is the more remarkable in connection with the great importance which he attaches, and justly to immigration as the great means of rendering the country strong and prosperous. With 11 millions of acres of public soil in the Red River and Saskatchewan Country, to invite the immigrant and increase our population, this question of Western extension becomes one of the greatest importance, but I will give you the forcible and eloquent observations of my honourable friend upon this subject as much more conclusive and instructing than anything I can afford:

The Hudson Bay territory includes two hundred and fifty thousand miles. Throwing aside the more bleak and inhospitable regions, we have a magnificent country between Canada and the Pacific, out of which five or six noble Provinces may be formed, larger than any we have, and presenting ta the hand of industry, and ta the eye of speculation,

[Page 20]

every variety of soil, climate, and resource. With such a territory as this to overrun, organize, and improve, think you that we shall stop even at the western bounds of Canada? or even at the shore of the Pacific? Vancouver’s Island, with its vast coal measures, lies beyond. The beautiful islands of the Pacific, and the growing commerce of the ocean, are beyond. Populous China and the rich East are beyond; and the sails of our children’s children will reflect as familiarly the sunbeams of the South as they now brave the angry tempest of the North. The Maritime Provinces which I now address, are but the Atlantic frontage of the boundless and prolific region; the wharves upon which its business will be transacted, and beside which its rich argosies are to lie. Nova Scotia is one of these. Will you, then, put your hands unitedly, with order, intelligence, and energy, to this great work? Refuse, and you are recreant to every principle which lies at the base of your country’s prosperity and advancement; refuse, and the Deity’s hand-writing upon land and sea is to you unintelligible language; refuse, and Nova Scotia, instead of occupying the foreground as she now does, should have been thrown back, at least behind the Rocky Mountains. God has planted your country in the front of his boundless region; see that you comprehend its destiny and resources—see that you discharge, with energy and elevation of soul, the duties which devolve upon you in virtue of your position.

Allow me in conclusion Mr. Speaker to thank the House for the kind and attentive hearing given to the discursive observations I have been enabled on the moment to offer in reply to the speech of my honourable friend.

James McKeagney [Cape Breton] defended the change of opinion of the member for Hants on the question of Union, holding that a change of opinion, when a man found he was wrong, was not discreditable. He (Mr. McKeagney) was not committed to opposition to Confederation; but he was opposed to the mode and manner in which it had been accomplished. He was here to seek concessions and changes, but did not say that under every circumstance, Confederation would be objectionable to Nova Scotia. (Hear, hear).

Hugh McDonald [Antigonish] said, Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend from Cumberland has ex- pressed his sympathy for other gentlemen from Nova Scotia occupying seats in the House, inasmuch as they are not in a position to claim support from the ministerial side, but I feel that we need no such sympathy and, speaking for myself, I feel that I occupy a much prouder position in representing the views and advocating the rights of those who sent me here, than if I had occupied that place which my honourable friend would as- sign. I am quite well aware that, in the face of what I know to be the Union feeling shared in by a large majority of this House, any observations that I can make are not likely to win much sympathy or carry conviction, and, at this late hour of the night, perhaps, it would not be just to the House or to myself that I should occupy much time. But I would be wanting in that public duty which I owe to the country which sent me here, if I failed to express my utter refusal to join in the congratulations which we are asked to tender to His Excellency, upon the consummation of a policy which I believe to be injurious to the best interests of my own Province, and which I know to be repugnant to the feelings and wishes of my constituents and of the overwhelming majority of the people of Nova Scotia. My honourable friend says that we are not in a position to apply for a repeal of the Union, because the unanimity of the people of Nova Scotia upon the subject, according to his figures, is questionable. He forgets that for the last three years he and those with whom he was associated, ignored the right of the people to a voice in any Constitutional changes. Who that is conversant with his speeches and pamphlets can forget how persistently he contended that the representatives of the people—not the people themselves-possessed the power and the right to effect such changes? Then, according to his own argument, what matters it that there is not (even if there was not) a perfect unanimity among our entire people? Have we not the whole body of representatives of the people of Nova Scotia—with two or three exceptions—in favour of repeal, and can there be any doubt as to our right to get it? But my honourable friend says that the elections in Nova Scotia were decided upon other issues, and that not a repeal of the Union, but a reproof for the manner of carrying it was the main issue. Now, I am in a position to deny the entire accuracy of that statement. Confederation or no Confederation was the main question in my own constituency, and in several others which I could name, but even if it was a question of reproof, how can we consistently rejoice, as this address asks us to do, at the success of a line of conduct which we invariably condemned and which received such signal reproof at the hands of our constituents. We are told that the Union was carried in Nova Scotia precisely in the manner indicated many years ago by Lord Durham and other eminent statesmen. Let me remind the honourable gentleman that he mistakes the views of Lord Durham; for that nobleman unhesitatingly states, in his report, that it would not be courteous or just to the Lower Provinces to include them in the Union, which he then advocated, without at first obtaining the consent of the people of

[Page 21]

these Provinces. There may be gentlemen here who remember what took place when the Quebec scheme was brought before the Parliament of Canada, and when some gentleman asked that it should be submitted to the people for their approval. The Hon. Mr. Brown, who then occupied a prominent position in the Government and Legislature of this country, if I recollect aright, in his place in Parliament, conceded the constitutional right to have it so submitted, if any doubt existed as to the opinions of the people, but, because no doubt did exist that an overwhelming majority would be returned in favour of it, he considered it impolitic to put the country to the expense of a general election to make a certainty more certain. But in the Province of Nova Scotia my honourable friend pursued a different course. He knew that a large body of the people were opposed to the Union. He himself declared it impracticable in 1865, and yet he persisted, contrary to the views of other statesmen, to force it upon an unwilling people. The honourable member says that the statesmen and people of England regarded this Union as a necessary condition of their continuance to defend this country. If so their speeches and public press did not express their views. What did Mr. Gladstone say in his speech upon the Bill to guarantee the money necessary for the construction of the Intercolonial Railway? Speaking of the defence of the Colonies he said that the liability of the Imperial Government for that purpose was very heavy indeed, and that it was the duty of the British Parliament in every way to get rid of it; and moreover that he regarded that road and this Confederation as the surest way to throw upon us the burden of our own defence. In this view he was supported by other statesmen, and several members of the leading press of England. We are told that it would be impossible for Nova Scotia to carry on her public works without raising her tariff, even if Confederation had not been accomplished. On this issue, also, I differ with my honourable friend. He knows well that our revenue, with the low tariff of ten per cent, has been steadily increasing for many years. That since 1852 it increased four-fold, and three-fold within the last ten years; and that seldom was there such a remarkable increase as during the last year. Assuming, therefore, that in future our progress would be proportionate to that of the past, what ground is there to apprehend any necessity to raise our tariff? The honourable member asserts that the Parliament of Nova Scotia sanctioned the Union Act, but how? After we had intelligence that it had passed the second reading in the House of Commons of England, the honourable member from Guysboro’ moved that it would be unjust to press il upon us without the consent of the people at the polls. That resolution was voted down by a House whose action was subsequently condemned by nearly the whole constituencies, and that was the negative assent to which my friend refers. We are told that this Union is such as to render an army unnecessary. If so, where the necessity of the measure promised in His Excellency’s speech to provide, by a large expenditure of money, for military purposes. The honourable gentleman’s statement that the Fenians and Annexationists of the Province were to be found in the ranks of the Anti-Unionists challenges a remark or two. I am not aware that there is one Fenian in Nova Scotia. Four years ago there was scarcely a disloyal person among our whole people, but I am not sure that there are not, now, thousands whose loyalty has been shaken by the arbitrary course pursued on the part of the Government, of which my honourable friend was a member. We received no assistance from Fenians, but it is now acknowledged, on all sides, that the Fenians, in their movements, contributed largely to the success of the Union party. One word about the Watkin story. My honourable friend undertakes to explain the misstatement, but as far as we are concerned it matters little what the intention of Mr. Watkin was,—whether it was a willful perversion of the truth or not. The fact is that the misstatement was made and largely contributed to deceive the British Parliament and people. At this late hour of the night it would be trespassing upon the patience of the House to say more than this, and, when I came in, I did not intend to say so much; but I would be doing very great injustice to the people who sent me here, and stultifying myself, if I should rejoice, as this address asks me to do, at the success of a course of procedure which I know to be as repugnant to the wishes and feelings of the vast majority of the people of Nova Scotia, as I believe it to be injurious to their best interests.

The House adjourned at half past eleven o’clock, to meet again on Monday at three p.m.