Document Information

Date: 1864-06-25
By: The Montreal Herald
Citation: “Latest from Quebec”, The Montreal Herald (25 June, 1864)
Other formats: TBA

LATEST FROM QUEBEC.

(SPECIAL TELEGRAM TO THE HERALD) HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY. Quebec, June 24.

After the recess Mr. Brown desired to call the attention of hon. gentlemen opposite to a matter which had excited some notice. It would be remembered that after the explanations the preceding night a question was put to the Atty. Gen. West as to the meaning to be attached to the words “well understood principles of Federal Government.” It would seem that these words were clear enough and that on this continent it could scarcely be necessary to ask their meaning. However, the answers of the Atty. Gen. West and Atty. Gen. East were too clear to admit of any mistake, but in consequence of the discussion in the other House some members had formed the idea that no agreement had been arrived at as to population being taken as the basis of representation in either branch of the Federal Government, and he thought it desirable that that impression should be removed.

Hon. J. A. McDonald thought there could be no room for misunderstanding the words used, but he had heard that there had been some misconception owing to what had taken place in the other house. There the hon. Premier stated that there was a written record which was to serve as the basis of the arrangements, and that he would not be drawn into any discussion upon it. As the subject had been again brought forward, however, he could not do better than quote the words he had made use of yesterday as being the expression of what the Ministry understood by the words; that was, that the local legislature should deal with local matters. As to the precise powers they were to exercise, he did not know that he or his colleagues had turned their attention to what should be their limits or how they were to be constituted; whether with an elective Governor and elective Council, or in what other manner, whether with one local Government for Canada or whether Canada was to be divided. However that might be, there would be local bodies for all local purposes while the Federal legislature would deal with all objects of common interest, and that legislature would be constructed on the well understood principles of Federal Government. Something had been said about Federal constitutions in ancient and modern times. The words of course referred to the Federal Government of modern times, and what was meant by that reference was known to everyone. The several states of the Confederacy would be equally represented in one branch, and that in the other or popular branch, the representation must be proportioned to population; but he had added that this was not to be understood as implying universal suffrage, but that all classes and interests are to be represented. He would conclude by stating that in consequence of what had taken place he had communicated with his colleagues in the Upper House, and they were perfectly in accordance with him on what he had stated. The hon. member also read a part of his remarks made the previous evening.

Mr. Brown said, of course the hon. member included in the words which he now confirmed the words on the same subject which had preceded those which he had quoted.

JOHN A. MCDONALD—I repeat everything I said the other day.

Mr. DORION—Then this is not an individual opinion only but the unanimous opinion of the Cabinet.

JOHN A. MCDONALD—Of course.

Mr. DORION—Because there is no doubt that, in the other House last night, the hon. Premier, declared that this question had not been considered at all.

JOHN A. MCDONALD—We all thought that the document would speak for itself, and that it was not necessary to discuss every word which seemed to carry its own meaning. It is only on account of what has taken place that I have gone into the subject.

Mr. BROWN—I can only say that the explanations of the Attorney-General now are perfectly in consonance with the conduct of that hon. gentleman from the first. Gentleman, however, would understand how the misunderstanding had taken place, the first conversations having been between himself and three members of the Cabinet who were on the other side of the House. Afterwards when Mr. Taché was present it was not supposed necessary to go into the precise meaning of every word used, each of which seemed perfectly clear in itself.

Mr. Dorion—Well that is very satisfactory, because to-day all through the House and in the streets we have heard the names of two Ministers of the Crown invoked in support of the pretention that both one and the other were opposed to the statement that representation was to be based upon population in any branch of the common Legislature. Moreover, besides the declaration made by the hon. Premier last right, when the attention of that hon. gentleman was again directed to the subject this evening, he had again declared that there was no unanimous understanding on the subject, and that whatever any one might say was only the expression of the individual opinion of that gentleman.

Mr. Turcotte said this was out of order, and if the matter was to be discussed, he should have something to say.

Hon. Mr. Dorion said a discussion on Ministerial explanations was always in order.

Mr. Turcotte insisted on the point of order.

Mr. Dorion—Then I move the adjournment.

Mr. Holton—I second it.

Cries of “Carried,” “carried,” from the Ministerial benches.

Mr. Dorion—The hon. members may do that if they please, but they cannot carry it till I have done. I say then, that the names of hon. Ministers, not of one but two have been mentioned to a great many members, and I will name the Ministers if it is wished. (Cries of “Name,” “name.”) I am quite ready to name if gentlemen on the Ministerial benches say so, the two Ministers who have gone about saying openly that they do not agree to the understanding which has been to-night affixed to the basis agreed upon. I am very glad that the matter has been again brought up, because that will enable us to ascertain whether the same system of deception which has been carried on for ten years in Lower Canada is to be continued a system of deception which has been carried on by the loudest declarations made at every hustings throughout the country that I and my friend were associating ourselves with Mr. Brown to do away with the Catholic religion to annihilate our language and to destroy the French Canadian nationality. I say we shall now ascertain whether gentlemen opposite will submit to the House a written document drawn in the most careful manner and then tell us that they do not know what it means. I am bound to say that the explanations of the Attorney-General West are frank and manly I cannot say as of the explanations made in and out of this House by other members of the cabinet on the contrary these explanations were absolutely drawn one, of them declined to say anything more even that very evening than that there was the documents but what he could not tell what it meant. However this evening at any rate there was no doubt that the three members of the Ministry there present the Attorney-General and the member for Sherbrooke were agreed on the meaning to be attached to the agreement that in one branch of the common federal legislature the representation of the country should be based upon its population that was so plain as to make it impossible that hereafter that he and his friends should be reproached by ministerial candidates with desire of voting down their own constituents, and of putting their French Canadian fellow-countrymen under the hoof of the British population. He and his friends could no longer be reproached for an alliance with Mr. Brown, and an alliance which was declared to be the bane of Lower Canada He was heartily glad that these facts had been elicited, and that thus gentlemen opposite had themselves put an end to the cry which for purposes of falsehood and deception had been raised.

Mr. CARTIER—The member in expressing his acceptance of the explanations of Mr. McDonald should take with it the qualification that representation based on population should be modified so as to represent interests and classes.

Mr. TURCOTTE also pointed out that the federation scheme by creating local legislature would provide for the protection of religion and other peculiar local interests.

Mr. DORION did not discuss if the system were good or bad; he merely commented on that deception which had for ten years been carried on in Lower Canada, and which the Premier had attempted to renew by giving in the upper House a different explanation of the words employed than he had given in this House.

Mr. MCDONALD, Toronto—There was clearly difference of opinion somewhere. Yesterday the Attorney-General East stated distinctly that in the Lower branch of the federal legislature the representation was to be based on population and territory, whereas the Attorney-General West with manliness and honesty asserted that it was to be based on population alone, though not to be understood as implying universal suffrage. That gentleman made no allusion whatever to territory, and if he had, he would have said what was absurd, or else there would be in that House representatives from vast tracts of land where no one lived or could live. The manliness of the Attorney General West, he should never forget.

Mr. CARTIER said the hon. member could not be acquainted with the Federal system in the United States, or he would not have misconceived what he (Mr. Cartier) had said about territory. He would have known that in the United States when portions of the country had a certain number of population, but not enough to give them the right to be a State, they were called territories, and sent to Congress representatives who could speak but not vote. That was what he meant when he spoke of territory.