Document Information

Date: 1867-12-11
By: Canada (Parliament)
Citation: Canada, House of Commons Debates, 1st Parl, 1st Sess, 1867 at 244-255.
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).

THE NORTH-WEST TERRITORY

William McDougall [Lanark North] moved that the House concur in the resolutions reported from the Committee of the Whole for the incorporation of Rupert’s Land and the North-West Territory with Canada.

Luther Holton [Châteauguay] moved in amendment the following resolutions:—

That according to the provisions of the British North America Act of 1867, an Order-in-Council founded on an address of the Canadian Parliament to Her Majesty, the Queen, praying that Rupert’s Land the North-Western Territory should be united to his Dominion on the terms and conditions to such address set forth, would have the full force and effect of an Imperial Statute, and would bind this House to provide whatever sum of money might be required to extinguish the claims of the Hudson’s Bay Company upon the said territory; and that to pledge irrevocably the public funds to the payment of a large and indefinite sum for the extinction of vague and doubtful claims, would be alike unwise on grounds of general policy, and Imprudent in view of the present financial position of the country; and that it is therefore inexpedient to adopt and address under the 146th clause of the British North America Act, 1867, until the nature, extent and value of the claims with which the territories In question are burdened shah be ascertained.

In moving the amendment, he said he did not propose doing more than offering a few observations first as to his own views on this general question, and secondly, an explanation of the proposition contained in the resolution which he offered to the House. He might say that before Confederation he was one of those who strongly urged the policy of obtaining this territory. He thought the mov-

[Page 245]

er of the resolutions would bear him out when he said that when he and that honourable gentleman were in the same government, he had no firmer supporter than himself (Mr. Holton) in all these steps which he considered it necessary to take in order to assert the rights and claims of this country over that territory. Of course the doctrine held by that honourable gentleman and held also by his friends in Upper Canada who had been mainly instrumental in incorporating this question into Canadian politics was very different from the doctrine laid down in these resolutions. They held that the territory belonged of right to us and that the Hudson’s Bay Company had no claim or title over it. Prior to Confederation, he (Mr. Holton) was willing to go, and in point of fact did go, with the mover of these resolutions in all those steps which he considered it prudent and proper to take in order to assert the right of this country over that vast territory; and further than that, since Confederation had been accomplished, he had felt it to be his duty to aid the Government as far as he could in carrying out in a proper way all the incidents of Confederation. He had been opposed to Confederation, not on principle, because he had no objections to union with our fellow colonists in the Lower Provinces, but because it was, in his opinion, imposed upon us before we were able to bear the burden of independence; and because, in his humble judgment, the Constitution adopted at Quebec was not such a constitution as suited the circumstances of the country. But Confederation having been accomplished and acquiesced in by a majority of his own Province, and perhaps of all of them, he came to this Legislature not to obstruct its fair working, but to aid as far as he could the object of all our politics, the good government of our country. He had felt that a natural consequence of this Confederation was undoubtedly the annexation of this territory to the country, and he had been and was now prepared to support the Government in aiding that object. Such being his position-a position which was in accord with that formerly occupied by the Minister of Public Works and by the leader of the Reform party in Upper Canada-he (Mr. Holton) had reason to regret that the Government had shown want of diligence in regard to this matter. Why was it they were only now prepared to open negotiations? Why was it they were not prepared to come down with an address which, in the contemplation of the Union Act should follow negotiations, and containing terms upon which the territory was to be acquired, would form the final step in the whole matter? Why, he asked, was it they were not in a position to do that? Because they had failed in this as they had failed in every other duty with which they were charged as Ministers of the Crown. They got up an appearance of doing something, however, and came down with these resolutions, which, if adopted, would hopelessly bind the House and the Government to whatever terms might be embodied in the Order-in-Council which might be passed on this address under the terms of the Union Act. He went on at some length to agree that this would be the effect of the resolutions proposed by Government, and that the Order-in-Council which might be passed would have all the force of an Imperial enactment. He thought this position incontrovertible, and challenged honourable gentlemen opposite to disprove it. Then with regard to the motion, it was equally sound and indisputable. The policy it recommended was, he contended, that which had always been urged by the Liberal party of Upper Canada, and especially by the Minister of Public Works. He thought it would still com- mend itself not only to that party, but to the good sense of the House.

James Beaty [Toronto East] said he rose to express his disapprobation of the tone adopted by the honourable gentleman who had just sat down, and by other honourable members who had addressed the House on this subject. The honourable gentleman said he had been opposed to Confederation. Well, he (Mr. Beatty) could say, on the contrary, that he had supported it, and it was a source of pleasure to him now to reflect that more than ten years ago when he offered himself as a candidate for the Legislative Council of Canada, he foreshadowed events which had since occurred, and expressed the hope that the time would arrive when British subjects on this continent would be united from ocean to ocean. (Hear.) He knew the House would sympathise with him, a young member, (laughter) and if in addressing it for the first time he should betray some embarrassment, he knew he could rely on its forbearance. (Hear, hear). He looked upon the questions which naturally arose out of Confederation as the most important which could be presented for the consideration of this House. He regarded two of them as being especially important as necessary to the full accomplishment of Confederation, and as rising superior indeed to all other considerations, namely,

[Page 246]

the construction of the Intercolonial Railway and the annexation of the North-West territory. He did not believe Confederation would ever be fully completed until these two objects were secured. He would not occupy the time of the House in reproducing arguments that had been offered in the various able speeches that had been made in favour of these resolutions, or in detailing the results of the explorations of the North-West Territory by those who had at different times been employed for that purpose. The time of the House has already been sufficiently occupied. But some of the speeches had not been delivered in vain, and he would venture to predict that that of the honourable gentleman who had had the honour of introducing these resolutions was one which would live in the memory of those who had been so fortunate as to hear it, and be read with admiration by future generations, while the speeches of those who had opposed them would be forgotten. (Hear, hear). If he (Mr. Beatty) thought for one moment that these resolutions would lead to the results some honourable gentlemen predicted, he would be the last to support them. If the extension of our Dominion were to cause deplorable effects, which some honourable gentlemen had declared it would, then he would not be found standing in his place in this House to favour it. If these resolutions were to lead to annexation with the United States, or to separation from the mother country, he for one would be the last to resist them. He was satisfied no such result would follow, but that they would tend to promote the prosperity and increase the power of this Dominion-and justify the expectation of those who looked forward to the opening up of that territory and its settlement by those British hearts of oak whose manly industry and hardihood had contributed so much to the welfare of this country.—(Hear, hear). He might give various reasons for his approval of those resolutions; but, as he had said already, the time of the House had been too long occupied by this debate. He would vote for them with all his heart, because he believed they would be another step towards cementing and consolidating the great Confederation which had been so happily inaugurated. Several honourable gentlemen had remarked upon the character of this Union, some alluding to it as a kingdom, and others regarding it as a near approach to independence. He considered that we did not occupy at all the position of a kingdom-we were a Dominion, and whatever power we possessed had been delegated to us by Her Gracious Majesty. He considered that this country still formed part of the British Empire, and he deplored the utterances of those who, by assuming that we were an independent people without an army, without a navy, and without means of defending ourselves, gave encouragement to the aggressive designs of the United States, and comfort to those enemies of our country who were ready on the first favourable opportunity to cross the border and make hostile inroads upon our homes. He did not mean to say that honourable gentlemen who employed this language, intended to injure their country, but he was sorry that they had indulged in it, because he believed it would have a bad effect elsewhere. Under all the circumstances, he hoped that there would be no further delay in securing the fruitful territory in the North-West. Now was the accepted hour. (Hear, hear). Now was the time to take action on this important matter, and we would be ungrateful recipients of the blessings contained in the Constitution Her Majesty had conferred upon us, if we did not hasten to extend them to that vast territory as soon as opportunity presented itself. It afforded him the greatest pleasure that under Divine Providence he had the opportunity of giving a sincere hearty vote for the immediate adoption of these resolutions. (Applause).

James Grant [Russell] said, at this advanced period of the Session, and after the able and elaborate discussion on the various resolutions on the North-West Territory, introduced by the Hon. Minister of Public Works, he would consider it unpardonable to detain the House by any lengthy remarks. The subject of these resolutions is one of the most important which has been before this House for a considerable length of time. It is one upon which in a great measure the future prosperity of the Dominion depends. The future of this Dominion as a consolidated British American Power on this continent is materially dependent upon the Union of the whole territory holding allegiance to the Crown. The influence of the Hudson’s Bay Company has done much to retard the prosperity in an agricultural and commercial point of view, of this whole Northern country. Where the fur trade prospered the cultivation of the soil would not be allowed. In such bounds immigration and colonization were out of the question. It was high time that some decided action should be taken, in order to ascertain upon what terms a Union more extensive than the present might be established. The principles

[Page 247]

of Confederation when first advanced by Canadian statesmen, were not to be confined to the Dominion as it now stands, but to extend also westward, having no other boundary in that direction than the Pacific. In carrying out these principles it was necessary to understand exactly how we stood with the Hudson’s Bay Company. By some there is considerable doubt expressed as to the precise nature of our claims. The question resolves itself into two parts, the local and constitutional, and the historical. The former has already been so well and ably dealt with by the Minister of Public Works that it would not subserve any good purpose to reopen it. The latter is involved in some doubt, and requires to be approached with considerable caution. Were it not for the monopoly exercised by that North-West Company, that vast territory would now be in a much different condition in every respect. Like the hunting grounds of Scotland, from which sheep are excluded so as not to spoil the shooting, so from these northern lands, the immigrant has been kept, that the fur trade might flourish and prosper. This condition of affairs must take a radical change. The Dominion must extend from the Atlantic to the Pacific, or these proportions so essential to permanence and strength will be wanting. It is a stern necessity, to be laboured for with ail the ability which Canadian statesmen can command. Should this country remain, as to the extension of territory, in its present bounds, who would be the losers? Those in the East and those in the West. Just in proportion as that vast country is opened up, and its commercial and agricultural capabilities turned to account, this new Dominion East and West will more particularly be developed. The magnificent harbours on the Atlantic seaboard will then outstrip even their present advanced and prosperous condition. They will grow and expand in magnitude, proportionate to the export and import trade that will eventually arise out of this extensive tract of country, and not alone that, but the trade by the far East, China and Japan, will pass en route to Europe, down the valley of the Ottawa. Thus will our contemplated Ottawa Ship Canal be of service, thus our Grand Trunk Railroad, and the Intercolonial Railroad, and the various branches of inland navigation, which will spring up as required by the trade of the country. Under these circumstances who would oppose the contemplated object in view in these resolutions. It is high time immediate action should be taken. Do we not observe that an extensive trade is springing up between St. Paul’s and Red River settlement in consequence of the want of any direct communication between that section of country and Canada. Thus we are annually losing thousands of dollars, which instead of flowing into American coffers, might be added to the revenue of this country. The Minnessotians are thoroughly impressed with the richness of the soil and the extensive mineral resources of that country. They are aware of the fact that no finer agricultural territory is to be found on this continent than that which lies in the great Winnipeg basin, and that watered by the Saskatchewan, the Assiniboine and Red River. These rivers are navigable for thousands of miles, flow on uninterruptedly, and like the Euphrates, the Nile, the Amazon, and the St. Lawrence, water the fertile plains on either side, and stimulate vegetation in all its present wildness and grandeur. Is it any matter of surprise that our ever active neighbours should bestir themselves, and thus develop trade and new commercial relations. The Minister of Justice remarked that they are trained up to go west from infancy. Have we not observed the truth of the statement? Within a short space of time that country, once under the control of England, with its thirteen States, declared its independence, and now has grown into 36 independent States. It required no extraordinary power ta produce that growth, nor is there anything very astonishing in it. These States are no doubt a vast region of fertile soil, to which the surplus people of Europe and Britain wended their way. Englishmen, Irishmen, Scotchmen, Frenchmen, Germans, etc., have taken their abode there. They have taken at the same time the knowledge and experience of their fathers, and entered a productive agricultural country with the implements of husbandry in their hands. In viewing the prosperity of a country, however, we must not alone confine our attention to superficial prosperity, for nothing is more deceptive. We must seek for good effects in the intellectual and social, as well as in the commercial growth of a people. Venice flourished in pomp and magnificence under a most detestable Government. India during its palmiest days, clothed with external splendor was under subjection to a foreign power. We are pleased to observe American prosperity, and not covetous of it. At the same time, we do not admire the stanzas of the Monroe doctrine—

“No pent up Utica contracts our powers,
But the whole boundless continent is ours.”

[Page 248]

We are satisfied with democracy as long as it does not extend beyond its proper bounds. A universal democracy would no more be acceptable to us, than a universal monarchy in Europe was to our forefathers, who fought well and shed their blood from the reign of Charles V to Napoleon, in order to prevent such taking place. (Cheers.) Canada possesses the same number of Provinces at the present time that it did when England took this country under her control, and although our Provinces are not more numerous, still a marked and substantial degree of internal improvement has taken place. A friendly feeling pervades the land, and in the midst of our prosperity we hope for a reciprocal interchange of that feeling from our neighbours. We have, it is true, lost the Reciprocity Treaty, but the results are more detrimental to American than Canadian trade, still we would be pleased to open up those avenues of trade which would be mutually beneficial. We feel that new commercial relations are gradually springing up, and this country united by a chain, fastened by one end in Halifax and moored by the other to the shore of that country, which has so glorious a name, a name every Canadian, every British subject delights in-Victoria. There is nothing to prevent our occupying a worthy position amongst the nations of the world. (Cheers.) These ideas were impressed on my mind years ago, and the worthy member for Hants had something to do in the diffusion of such. I regret he does not now in his old days attempt to realize the dream of his boyhood. The honourable member for Wellington remarked that there was no coal in that country? Such is not in accordance with the knowledge of the geological formation of the country. The material is there in considerable quantity; not only coal-but iron, lead, silver, gold and various other metals. When iron and coal exist in such abundance, they are a great source of wealth. With such materials England made rapid strides in the mechanical arts, and we in Canada may hope for happy results from such products also. The iron in Mountains of the Ottawa must smelt down under the influence of Nova Scotia coal, and the forges of our country turn out the implements of warfare if ever required. The same spirit of independence that has ever characterized us as a people, is firm as ever, and with the assurance of British support, if needed, why should not our Dominion prosper. We on this North American Continent are one people, we enjoy a common literature, we breathe the air of freedom, and alike delight in mutual prosperity. A prosperity not to be lessened by the expenditure of what may be required by the Government of the country, in whom we had full and implicit reliance, to secure this additional territory. With it our new organization will prosper, and assume that magnitude, and realize that commercial prosperity which will enable us to lessen our debt, and strengthen our position as a people. Under these circumstances he would have pleasure in recording his vote in favour of the resolutions. (Cheers.)

Francis Jones [Leeds North and Grenville North] said after the course taken by members in praising the fertility of the country and great advantage it would be to Canada, they could not refuse the Government if they asked five or ten million dollars to extinguish the claims of the Hudson’s Bay Company. He would not assume any such responsibility. The question did not exclusively belong to either the Reform or Conservative party, but was in some measure supported by both. He referred to the project which was entertained by the Government of which the honourable member for Chateauguay was a member, to pay a certain amount for the construction of telegraphic communication between the boundary of Canada and the Pacific Ocean, and ridiculed the idea, stating that the Indians would burn the poles for firewood. He said that in some regions which has been praised for their fertility, wheat and barley did not ripen, and between Dog Lake and Lake of the Woods, frost remained in the ground but a few feet below the surface during the summer. After passing 49° latitude there was very little land adapted for agricultural purposes.

After the recess—

Francis Jones [Leeds North and Grenville North] continued his remarks concerning the severity of the climate in the new territory, and quoted authorities to show that it was ill adapted for colonization, the thermometer sometimes indicating 47 degrees below zero at Fort Garry. There were 337,000 square miles in the Dominion. This was quite territory enough at present, as half that amount of territory on the continent of Europe contains fifty million inhabitants.

Joseph Bellerose [Laval] said we had the choice between the annexation of these territories to Canada or to the States, and Canada with them. It was a political question, greater than the financial question. We have numerous proofs of the States’ desire to acquire that country, and then the independence of Canada would be greatly endangered. This

[Page 249]

acquisition is the basis of an empire, the safeguard of our frontier, and our greatest guarantee for the future.

Peter Lawson [Norfolk South], in reply to Mr. Jones, read a number of extracts from Mr. Dawson’s explorations in the North-West, describing in very strong language the fertility of immense sections of that territory. He then referred to the difficulty which seemed to loom up in the minds of some gentlemen as to the cost of defending the territory against the United States. He asserted that we had no reason to look on the United States as an aggressive nation. It was not recorded against them that they had ever wantonly invaded the countries in their neighbourhood. When they had desired territory they had offered to purchase it. He thought this continued expression of our fears about the United States was very ungrounded. The people of this country were brave and loyal, and it would be degrading to us to shape our policy by a consideration of what the United States might or might not do. We should take an example of warning from the people of that country. After they became commercially great they devoted their attention too exclusively to commercial pursuits, and failed to look after their political rights and liberties. We saw what was their position to-day in consequence of this, and we should be careful to guard our own rights and liberties, and carry out our own policy, irrespective of the views of any foreign country.

Joseph Howe [Hants] referring to the remarks of the last speaker, said no doubt our people were brave, but in modern times war had come to be a question of needle guns, and of how many were on the one side and how many on the other. In our case it was a question of four millions against four and thirty millions, and it did not argue a man to be disloyal that he acknowledged that fact. But we were told that England would defend us. How long would that continue? The English manufacturer had to pay fifteen per cent to get any article he produced into Canada, and now when the custom houses which gave him some chance in the Maritime Provinces were swept away, and the Canadian manufacturer ran over the whole country shutting out English manufacturers by duties of 15 to 20 per cent, how long under those circumstances would English manufacturers consent to pay taxes to defend us? After some further remarks on the defence question, Mr. Howe proposed to refer to the speech of the member for Cumberland (Dr. Tupper) of Monday night. He said that when the people of Canada got accustomed to that gentleman they would find he never made a speech of which three-fourths, as on Monday night, was not about Mr. Howe. Having replied to charges of inconsistency brought against him by Dr. Tupper, he said as the learned member was always contrasting him (Mr. Howe) with some one else, he would for the moment contrast the honourable gentleman himself with the Minister of Customs. When the Minister of Customs had pledged his word to his co-delegates at Quebec, on this measure of Confederation, he went back to his country, dissolved the House and put the measure before the people. He was beat and a second appeal was made. He might call in question the means by which that appeal was made, but it was a fact that the Minister of Customs made two appeals to his people, and had given them twice an opportunity to decide on this question, and when he came up here to Canada, he came to a large extent sustained by the public opinion of his Province. But when the member for Cumberland went back from the Quebec Conference to Nova Scotia, was it consistent that distrusting his own people he did not dare to put the measure before them? Was it consistent that he should go into their legislature and there declare the measure of Confederation was absolutely impracticable? Was it creditable to his statesmanship or patriotism that at last he got the measure carried by means which he (Mr. Howe) would not stop to characterize? Did not every man here know that the honourable gentleman’s conduct in managing that great measure was now the very weakness of it, inasmuch as he had come here single, and alone, leaving behind a sentiment so overwhelming against Confederation, that every man here was more or less embarrassed and disturbed by apprehensions of what the future might bring forth. The honourable gentleman had said that while the elections were going on in Canada, certain newspapers in Nova Scotia violently attacked the existing administration in Canada and supported the Hon. G. Brown, but that as soon as Mr. Brown was beaten, the tone of the Anti-Confederates suddenly changed, and that they had offered themselves to the Government to some extent for purchase and sale. This was unjust and unfair. So long ago as the 18th of June, two or three months before the elections came off, he (Mr. Howe) addressed a letter to the people of Canada, in which he said that since the passage of the Imperial Act, he had had no

[Page 250]

correspondence with Mr. George Brown, -and had at that time no political connection with him. He and his friends had no further connection with him than that they knew who George Brown was, and what his position was in Canada. A man of his indomitable energy, great ability, and large political influence in Canada, could not but throw his shadow as far as Nova Scotia; but that was all, and long before he (Mr. Howe) knew what Mr. Brown’s fate would be at his election, he had defined his own position. As to overtures to or from gentlemen opposite, they had treated himself and the other gentlemen from Nova Scotia with that frank courtesy and hospitality that was due by gentlemen to strangers, but they had not approached them with any offer or overture. They knew that the members from Nova Scotia, having put their hands to the plough, could not then turn back, and that until this controversy was fought out not a man of them could accept without dishonour any such offer, and they had consequently respected their position. He then adverted to Dr. Tupper’s argument that North-West extension was necessary for the protection of our rights. Our rights hitherto had been perfectly secure, and he (Mr. Howe) believed the further our territory was ex- tended the more our political rights and security of our country would be endangered. As regarded his argument that it would encourage immigration, he thought it absurd. Was there not land and employment and bread in Canada to attract immigrants? Had it not been proclaimed that our great want was population, and were we to be at great expense to get new lands in order to fill them by depopulating the country within the proper bounds of the Dominion? The honourable member from Cumberland, without any knowledge of finance, had taken it for granted that Nova Scotia had largely drawn from the treasury of the Dominion. It should be remembered that when Nova Scotia went into the Union, her debt was set down at eight millions, though she did not really owe that amount. She was therefore entitled to draw from the treasury of the Dominion any sum her debt was less than eight millions. If the honourable gentleman would take the trouble to examine what has been paid and what has been received by the Dominion since 1st July upon revenue account, he would find the Dominion owes Nova Scotia at this moment $152,000. He had been charged with belittling the strength of the Dominion, and advertising its feebleness. He might be allowed to say that his whole life had been spent in endeavouring to elevate these Provinces-in vindicating as far as he was able when opportunity presented, the honour and manliness of his fellow subjects. He would tell the honourable gentleman (Dr. Tupper) that if the spirit in which his remarks were made should pervade the House, and if his counsels were taken, he might inflame and aggravate the forces which at this moment were subject of serious thought to every member of this Parliament, and which would go to weaken the Dominion. Whatever might become of the measure before the House, he trusted that the debate would be conducted with that calm and honourable spirit which became an assembly such as this.

Christopher Dunkin [Brome] said that the question before the House had nothing to do with the domestic policy of Nova Scotia. It was simply a question whether we should have those territories now or never. Refusal to take possession of that country now would to all intents and purposes, be a refusal to take possession of it for all time to come. We must look at the consequences of our saying no, as well as the consequence of our saying yes. The opening up of this country was as much a part of the policy inaugurated in the Quebec Conference as the building of the Intercolonial Railway. He was willing to admit that there was a time when a different solution of this question was possible, but we halted then, and that opportunity was lost. Whatever the terms were upon which they proposed to receive this territory, they were not called upon to bear the whole expense of defending it. The Mother country would be still bound, and he believed would be willing to back us up with her whole strength. Why was delay asked? It seemed to spring from an unworthy suspicion, not to say fear, that England did not mean to take care of us, but was asking by this means to throw us off. Such suspicion was unfounded. True, there was a school of politicians in England who desired to throw off her colonies, and if we refused to take possession of this territory we would be playing into their hands. If that territory was worth anything to any one, it was of worth to Canada, and if she refused to have anything to do with it, it might be said with some show of plausibility that it was worth less to England. The people of Canada had more at stake in the matter than had England. The people of Canada were better qualified to deal with the question than the people of England. Let Canada take possession of this terx4tory, open it up for settlement, develop

[Page 251]

its vast resources, and backed as she would be by the whole strength of Britain, she would build up a country which would be the right arm of England’s power.

Thomas Parker [Wellington Centre] denied that to make acquisition under existing circumstances was the policy of the Liberal party of Ontario, as he formerly declared, it was never their policy to secure it under such terms as those proposed, nor till the state of the finances would permit. He proceeded at some length to show the enormous expense which the scheme of the Government, if carried out, would involve, amounting to a total capitalized debt of 30 millions. The reason the subject was not taken up at the Quebec Conference was that the finances would not permit, and he asked the House and the country if they were in a condition now to justify the expenditure necessary to extinguish the claims of the Hudson’s Bay Company, to open up communication and to maintain a system of Government. There were three or four alternative propositions which he was prepared to support-either to create this territory a Crown colony, for the monopoly created by the Home Government to be extinguished by them, and for the Territory to be ceded free from the claims of the Hudson Bay Company. These things failing, he should adhere to the policy once announced of first addressing the Crown for the possession of the country.

Joseph Rymal [Wentworth South] thought the territory would cost much more than we could now afford. We were fully as great already as we should endeavour to make ourselves at present. He thought we had as much on our hands as we could take care of, in the construction of the Intercolonial Railway, and the carrying out of necessary improvements. These would give us all we could accomplish for the next 50 years. He referred to Indian troubles likely to ensue, and which might even lead to international disputes, and we should be held re- sponsible for depredations they might go over and commit in the States. Consolidation of present territory is of more importance than its extension at present. Believing the acquisition would be detrimental to the best interests of the country, he could not vote for the resolution of the Minister of Public Works.

William McDougall [Lanark North] briefly referred to one or two points in the debate. He contended that the policy of the Government, of which the member for Chateauguay was a member, had been to open up the territory to occupation; but the proposition made at that time, which was rejected, was a motion to construct a telegraph line, for which 500,000 pounds sterling was to be guaranteed, and also four or five per cent on the outlay. The object in view would not have been attained in that way, but on the ground taken by the Government, as stated in a minute of council, was that it was desirable to open the territory to settlement, asserting the claim to that portion which could be proved to have been in the possession of the French at the time of the cession.

Luther Holton [Châteauguay] replied to the Minister of Public Works. The resolutions had been introduced without any true conception of their scope or consequences. The honourable gentleman had obviously overlooked the distinction between this and an ordinary series of resolutions on which to found an address to His Excellency. These resolutions, if adopted, and the Order-in-Council passed thereon, would have the full effect of an Imperial Act. Then it was objected that this was a motion of want of confidence. He thought it un- worthy the dignity of the House to raise such an objection, which if pushed to such an extreme length as had been attempted, would deprive the House of any power of improving legislation, or interfering with the business, without raising the cry of want of confidence. This was not the ordinary Parliamentary practice in England, and it ought not to be resorted to here. He then briefly reviewed the argument in favour of his amendment, and hoped that at another stage the Minister of Public Works would condescend to answer those points, which to-night he had thought unworthy of notice.

Alexander Mackenzie [Lambton], though agreeing with the principle of the amendment, did not see that its adoption would be of any practical advantage, while it would put back indefinitely the chance of obtaining the territory. He would therefore vote against the amendment, but without voting confidence in the Government.

John O’Connor [Essex] said that he had not intended to trouble the House with any remarks on the subject presented by the resolutions now under consideration, until the amendment proposed by the honourable member for Chateauguay showed that there was a determination to test the sense of the House by a vote. That being the case, he (Mr. O’Connor) felt that in justice to the large constituency which he had the honour to represent, and to himself, he could not give a mere silent vote; and therefore he desired to state to the House, as briefly as possible, his views on the

[Page 252]

subject. (Hear, hear.) The question which first presented itself was, whether it was desirable that we should acquire the territories referred to in the resolutions, and make them part and parcel of the Dominion. His answer was yes-emphatically, yes. And his reasons for giving that answer were, first, whether we were to remain for a long time, as at present, a part of the British Empire—of that Empire upon whose dominions, as it has been said, the sun never sets; or whether we should before a very distant day go forth and take a place beside the Mother Country, amongst the nations of the earth, with, as the honourable member for Montreal West (Mr. McGee) had a few days ago, beautifully and pathetically expressed it, our parent’s blessing on our head; in either case, by reason of the fact, that our system of Government, our institutions, and our feelings, were in their nature largely monarchical, and therefore in spirit, opposed to the form of Government which prevailed in the United States, we were destined to be, and were now, jealously regarded, as a rival pow- er to the United States. It should therefore be a cardinal point with us while we had the resources of the Empire at our back, and while the honour and prestige of the British Crown was concerned in it, to extend our territory, and render our frontier commensurate with that of our rival, the United States. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) The second reason he would give, was, that in order to establish and maintain such a power in our peculiar position, it was absolutely necessary that our Government should rule with unbroken sway from the shores of the Atlantic to those of the Pacific, and that our country should, as undoubtedly it could, and as he (Mr. O’Connor) believed it was destined to become, the great commercial highway between the Empires of the East and those of the West. Such an extension would also place us in accord with the spirit of the age, which was to form great Empires instead of small States: as is shown by the example of the United States, of Russia, of France, of Italy, and of Prussia. The expansion would afford a field of industry, enterprise, and speculation, worthy of and inviting to the ambition of a class of young men who are fast increasing amongst us, and who, being well educated, of high spirit and enterprising, are now, after having overstocked the learned professions, and glutted the more respectable trades and callings amongst us, compelled to seek in the wider field, and more enterprising spirit presented by the United States and the people thereof, something worthy of their education, spirit and ambition. Of this result we have had during a few years past hundreds, nay, thousands, of examples detrimental to our country. But furthermore such an expansion of territory with its great variety of climate, soil and channels of trade would soon cause our fine agricultural and great mineral resources to be suitable developed, which, with the trade of our noble fisheries, expansive forests, and the manufactures for which our unrivalled water privileges afforded immense facilities, would render our country prosperous, populous, wealthy and great. Aye, and he hesitated not to say that we shall be raised to a position to give to civilization itself a new impetus, and be to it a beacon of light and a pillar of support. (Cheers.) The next question which presents itself and that which is principally questioned in this debate is, whether the present is an opportune time for seeking that expansion to which he (Mr. O’Connor) had alluded, and authority for which is sought by the resolutions now under discussion. He (Mr. O’Connor) would answer, unquestionably this is the time, nor, if wisdom should be exercised, could the matter be pressed with too much energy, vigor or rapidity. Because the sooner the foundation was laid, so much the sooner would the superstructure be raised; and the broader and deeper the foundation was laid the more solid would it be, and so much larger and durable would be the superstructure. But there was another reason for desiring speedy action; and it was a fact to the importance of which we should be alive, and which we should regard with jealous anxiety, that the people of the United States were desirous of obtaining control of that which was called the North-West territory; and that they were systematically and vigorously, though stealthily operating to that end, by encouraging a class of traders and speculators to go in and get control of the trade, and by that and other artifices to Americanize the people and direct their thoughts towards annexation. Besides, as the number and interests of these American adventurers increased, their hold would be firmer, and they would be enabled to put forward with a show of right, claims which if disputed would give them an opportunity and a protest for calling on the Government of the United States to sustain them. And by appealing to the prejudices of the American people and to the cherished policy of the Monroe doctrine, an outcry would be raised which would compel that Government, even if not otherwise willing to interpose as

[Page 253]

desired. Such was the manner in which the United States had obtained Louisiana in 1803, for $15,000,000. Such was the manner in which they had obtained Florida from Spain in 1819, for $5,000,000, which, however, they claimed for and got leave to pay to their own citizens, who had trumped up, and put forward those claims against the Spanish Government with a very slight show of reason. It appears evident that this consideration has obtained with the Hudson’s Bay Company, and it accounts for their desire to get rid of their interests as soon and as advantageously as they can. And it may be reasonably feared that unless this country acts promptly, those enterprising Americans will strengthen their position, and greatly further their ends by acquiring the stock and claims of the company, whether well or ill-founded-a movement which he (Mr. O’Connor) hesitated not to say would in a short time be disastrous to this Dominion. For the foregoing and other reasons which would readily present themselves to reflecting minds, but which in the present impatient temper of the House, he would not take time to express, he concluded that delay was dangerous-that procrastination would serve but to increase the difficulties to be overcome, and the expense of overcoming them; and thus it may cause the failure of the whole grand design so well conceived, and up to the present time so well executed of establishing on this continent a British American Dominion, which having the necessary elements was destined to be an Empire, the ultimate limit of whose power, greatness, and splendor, only the Omniscient could foresee. Therefore, he would say with the honourable member for Toronto East (Mr. Beatty) now is the acceptable-yes, now is the appointed time (cheers.) He (Mr. O’Connor) would now proceed to examine as rapidly as he could, in deference to the impatience of members who, he saw, were desirous, at this late hour, to vote and retire to rest, examine some of the arguments which had been adduced by honourable members against the resolutions. But before doing so, he would call the attention of the House to the parties by whom these arguments were used, to their position in relation to the Ministry, and to the Government in its more general and permanent sense. It was a principle of human nature, than which no truth of the moral order was more capable of demonstration, and of which every man’s experience and observation afforded him evidence, that man’s intellect is swayed, and to a great extent governed, by feelings, by mere emotions. Or as Sir William Hamilton has it, “the feelings and desires exert an influence not under the control of reason.” When a man perceives an object which he believes highly desirable, if not necessary to his happiness and to the welfare of those who are dependent on him, and whom he loves, and becomes a darling object-his mind is possessed by it, his feelings are enlisted, and his intellect made captive, and he regards with enmity, bitterness, and perhaps with deadly hatred, anything which comes between him and the attainment of that object. What was thus true of every man may be applied with additional force to parties, and particularly political parties, the members whereof were bound together by community of feeling and unity of design. When the individual, or the party, argues against that which militates against individual or party interests which are the objects of strong feeling and desire, the arguments are so coloured and intensified by the feelings as to be dangerous to truth by force of the captive intellect. Arguments from such a source were to be received with caution, examined with care, and accepted for nothing more than they were intrinsically worth. In the present instance, there were in the House two parties opposed to the resolutions of the Government, who, though acting in concert, regarded the resolutions from different stand points, and opposed them for totally different reasons, and with a view to different results. First, the party (comparatively few in number, but not lacking in ability and influence) which might be designated the opposition proper, composed of those who profess to regard the present Government as a coalition formed without political necessity, and therefore as politically immoral. These gentlemen were ready to use, and on this occasion they had used, all the weapons of party warfare. Hence we had listened to strong assertions, doleful predictions, highly coloured arguments, and such expressions of dissatisfaction as might naturally be expected from a party who desired to hurl the present occupants of the Treasury benches from their seats and put themselves instead. Next we had the party composed of the majority from Nova Scotia and the minority from New Brunswick, led by the honourable member for Hants (Mr. Howe), who complained that their feelings had been outraged, that their dearest rights had been wrested from them by fraudulent means-that they had been surreptitiously forced into a union which they detested and repudiated; and which they declared themselves determined to sunder as

[Page 254]

soon as possible, and by almost any means. Speaking under the influence of such feelings, was it not likely, and was it not observable, that the arguments of these gentlemen partook of the colour, the bitterness and the intensity of their feelings: and that those arguments were subservient to that design which they had determined on and loudly proclaimed, of dismembering the Dominion in order that they might escape from it? They saw and felt that the passing of these resolutions would materially increase the obstacles in the way of their design. The old Roman motto was, “Delenda est Carthago”; Carthage must be destroyed so that Rome may be unrivalled mistress of the world. And the motto of these gentlemen was the Dominion must be sundered in order that they might escape from it. Hence to a settled purpose attended with strong feeling might be attributed the powerful efforts, the biting sarcasm, the burning indignation, and pathetic appeals of the Honourable member for Hants, and the denunciations not less vehement of other honourable members of his party. Therefore the cry with both parties had been delay, delay or the country would be ruined! In his (Mr. O’Connor’s) opinion there had been too much delay and inaction-too long had we lagged behind the spirit of the age. (Hear, hear.) It had not been urged by any of the opponents of these resolutions that at no time should the territories in question be sought for and brought into the Union; on the contrary it was conceded that it should be done some time. With the opposition proper the time would be when they should occupy the treasury benches. With the other party it would be when they were out of the Union. These hypotheses he ventured to say, pretty fairly indicated the keys which had opened the boxes of the respective parties arrayed against the resolutions, from which had gone forth a torrent of denunciation intended by the one party to be as destructive to the Ministry, and by the other as destructive to the integrity of the Dominion, as the opening of Pandora’s box was to the health of the world. The principal arguments against the resolutions were, first, that the acquisition of the territories referred to would cost an immense sum of money, which at present the country cannot afford to pay; second, that after the acquisition, protecting and retaining them in the Dominion might cost an enormous sum; and third, that no possibility of right should be acknowledged in the Hudson Bay Company. As to the first and third objections they assumed contrary to the fact that a large sum of money was proposed by the resolutions to be paid, and that the claims of the Company were admitted to the fullest extent. The resolution merely provides hypothetically for the settlement of any right that might be found to exist. The expenditure of money was provided against by the condition that any settlement should be subject to the approval of Parliament, to which also application would have to be made for any money which might be required. Without a provision for settlement the Government and Parliament of Great Britain would not listen to any negotiation; because they were bound to protect whatever were the rights of the Hudson Bay Company, as well as the rights of any other company or person within the allegiance of Great Britain. He (Mr. O’Connor) was persuaded that nothing fairer could be proposed than that the question of right should be settled by the judges of the land. The second objection is an extraordinary one. The bare possibility of some expenses being incurred in protecting the territory was put forward as a serious argument against organizing that which was necessary to our existence as a power on this Continent. Had such been the spirit which had obtained in the United States, could they be the great power they now were? They had spent $15,000,000 to acquire Louisiana; $5,- 000,000 to acquire Florida, and thousands of lives and millions of treasure to drive the Seminoles out of it; and nearly the same may be said of the other territories acquired by them. But we were to run no risk for expansion according to the opponents of these resolutions. Besides, if difficulty was anticipated in acquiring the territories in question, it was an additional reason why we should now proceed while the honour and prestige of the British Empire were concerned, and its military and naval power were at our back. (Hear, hear.) But nothing which he (Mr. O’Connor) had heard during this debate had astonished him so much as the speech of the honourable member for Wellington Centre (Dr. Parker). That honourable member had thundered it forth as a principle that it was “one of the inalienable rights of man to possess and cultivate the soil,” and that we should assert that right by going in and driving the Hudson Bay Company out. And that barbarous sentiment seemed to find an echo from the honourable member for Hants (Mr. Howe) who had called on the Hon. Minister of Militia to call out the posse comitatus and assert that right with the strong hand. Did it occur to those honourable

[Page 255]

gentlemen that the mother country was bound to protect her subjects in the enjoyment of any rights she has conferred on them, and that the proceeding which they so considerately advised would be a levying of war on Her Majesty the Queen-an act of high treason? But, aside from this consideration, which served to show that passion and not judgment had furnished the opponents of this measure with arguments, he (Mr. O’Connor) could tell those honourable members, that the principle thus evidenced was the same which had actuated the Vandals when they over-ran the Roman Empire and darkened Western civilization. It was the same which had actuated the first French revolutionists, and which had given birth to the horrors of the fearful tragedy of that period when the fair soil of France had been drenched with the blood of its best sons and daughters. And to bring it nearer home, it was the same principle which was guiding those lawless bands in the United States called Fenians, who had been giving us so much anxiety, and putting us to so much trouble and expense. (Hear, hear and cheers.) Notwithstanding the impatience evinced by many members to end discussion and take a vote, he (Mr. O’Connor) desired to trespass on their patience a moment longer. He could not sit down without referring to a passage of the speech delivered that evening by the honourable member for Hants. The honourable gentleman had spoken in terms almost boastful of the aggressive tendency of the policy of the United States; and in terms bordering on contempt of our resources and power of resistance in case of aggression from that quarter, while with the same breath he more than insinuated that the people of Nova Scotia would, if not permitted to withdraw from the Union, assume an attitude of defiance to both the mother country and this Dominion. Did the honourable gentleman mean insurrection, and an invocation of the aggressive spirit of the United States? If so, the sooner it was understood the better. (Hear, hear, and cheers.)

The members were then called in and the vote taken, when the amendment was lost. Yeas, 41; Nays 104.

Yeas—Anglin, Bechard, Blake, Bourassa, Cameron, (Inverness) Carmichael, Cheval, Chipman, Coffin, Connell, Coupal, Croke, Dorion, Forbes, Fortier, Geoffrion, Godin, Holton, Howe, Huntington, Joly, Jones, (Halifax) Jones, (Leeds and Grenville,) Kierzkowski, Killam, McDonald, (Glengarry) McDonald, (Antigonish) McDonald, (Lunenburg) Masson, (Terrebonne) McKeagney, McLellan, Paquet, Parker, Power, Ray, Ross, (Victoria, N.S.) Rymal, Savary, Shanly, Smith, Tremblay.—41.

Nays—Abbott, Archambeault, Ault, Beatty, Beaubien, Bellerose, Benoit, Benson, Blanchet, Bidwell, Bolton, Bowell, Bowman, Bown, Brousseau, Brown, Burpee, Burton, Cameron, (Huron,) Campbell, Carling, Caron, Cartier, Casault, Cayley, Chamberlin, Cimon, Colby, Crawford, (Brockville,) Crawford, (Leeds,) Currier, Daoust, Desaulnier, Dobbie, Drew, Dufresne, Ferris, Fortin, Gaucher, Gaudet, Gendron, Gibbs, Gray, Grover, Hagar, Hunt, Hurdon, Jackson, Johnson, Keeler, Kempt, Kirkpatrick, Langevin, Lapum, Lawson, Little, Macdonald, (Cornwall,) Macdonald, Sir J. A. (Kingston,) McDonald, (Middlesex,) Macfarlane, Mackenzie, Magill, Masson, (S) McCallum, McCartney, McConkey, McDougall, McGreevey, McMillan, (Restigouche) McMillan, (Vandreuil) McMonies, Metcalfe, Morris, Morison, (Victoria, O.) Munroe, O’Connor, Oliver, Perry, Pinsoneault, Pope, Poulion, Pozer, Read, Redford, Renaud, Robitaille, Rose, Ross, (Dundas) Ross, (Prince Edward), Simard, Snider, Sproat, Stephenson, Stirton, Thompson, (Haldimand) Tilley, Walsh, Webb, Wells, White, Whitehead, Wilson, Wright, Young.—104.

The resolutions were then read and passed, and on motion of Hon. Mr. McDougall a Committee was appointed to draft Address thereon.

The Committee presented report of Address, which was read a first time and ordered to a second reading to-morrow, and the House adjourned at 1.30.