Document Information

Date: 1867-06-07
By: The Montreal Herald
Citation: “Political Affairs”, The Montreal Herald (7 June, 1867)
Other formats: TBA

POLITICAL AFFAIRS.—THE DIVISION OF MONTREAL CENTRE.

—There is something strangely inconsistent between the preaching which we have heard during the last few years from the public men who have advocated the Union of the Provinces, and their more recent utterances. Hitherto everything was presented in the most attractive colours. Peace and good will were to prevail throughout the united Provinces; strife, bitterness and sectional jealousies were to disappear, and in fact every possible ill was to be healed by the great panacea of Confederation. But now that the new constitution is an accomplished fact, and even those who, like ourselves, were opposed to the measure, have made up their minds to give it a fair trial and assist in working it out successfully, all is changed. What people at a distance—for those in the Province were never so blind as to be brought into such a belief—but what people at a distance were taught to regard as a most popular and practicable measure, one universally accepted in the Provinces concerned, now to all appearances presents so many probabilities of difficulty in the carrying out, that its advocates feel themselves impelled on every public occasion to impress upon their hearers the absolute necessity, if success be desired, of exercising a very large degree of mutual forbearance. This has been the theme of all the speeches delivered by the delegates on their return to this country; it was specially dwelt upon by all the speakers at Lennoxville a few days since, and the same thing was again earnestly enunciated by Mr. Rose at the meeting of his friends in Montreal this week. [Therefore?] [we?] [can?] come to no other conclusion than that these gentlemen have been all along declaring that to be popular, which they knew to be unpopular, and that that would work well, promote good will, and stimulate trade, which they knew, or were afraid would do nothing of the sort. However, having pointed out the anomaly, that is all we intend to do. Regrets now are useless, and we have long since determined so far as we are concerned, to give the new system the fair trial asked for, and to exercise all the forbearance that may be called for. We have been led into these remarks by the report of the meeting of Mr. Rose’s friends a day or two since, which informs us that that gentleman is again to be a candidate for the electoral Division of Montreal Centre in the new House of Commons. Mr. Rose indicates that the elections will probably not take place until the month of September; but having taken the field thus early, our first duty as public journalists is to put the electors on their guard against pledging themselves to the support of any particular individual until all the candidates are in the field. We are told that now when we are entering on a new phase of our political existence, trained men, men of experience, are the men required to successfully work out the new order of things. It seems to us on the contrary, that this is just the time when a change may most conveniently be made in our representatives. Men of integrity, ability, and intelligence are just as capable of carrying us forward on our new career as those who have been dabbling in politics nearly all their lives. The new constitution is new to everyone alike, and fresh men at the helm will be just as likely to give us a fair start as the old hands, however great may be their experience in party politics and political trickery. Mr. Rose’s friends are said to have been perfectly satisfied with his explanations of his past course. But we ask the electors of Montreal Centre, the majority of them practical, business men, what Mr. Rose has done during his parliamentary career to advance their commercial interests, or those of the country generally? The existing state of affairs is most anomalous and should be brought to an end. Montreal, the great commercial centre of the United Provinces, is represented by three lawyers, who, however great may be their general experience, we unhesitatingly declare to be incapable of vigorously forwarding interests of which their knowledge is comparatively limited, and all derived second-hand. The Division to which we now particularly refer—Montreal Centre—may be said to represent one half of the trade of Canada. Is this a constituency whose interests can be fairly represented by a gentleman whose knowledge of commerce is wholly derived from reading law books? A merchant aud a merchant only should have the guardianship of such an important trust. Mr. Rose is declared to have been ever attentive to his constituents. We have no doubt that he has always treated them with the gentlemanly courtesy which characterizes him, but what can be said of his attention to their interests after the shuffling on the Tariff last session. No one spoke more strongly than he against Mr. Galt’s proposals; he declared then, and has repeated on different occasions since, that he was conscientiously opposed to the tariff, and yet when it came to a question of voting, he forsook his constituents and stultified himself by voting against the motion proposed in condemnation of Mr. Galt’s scheme. Again, when the question of the Seat of Government was before Parliament, did Mr. Rose vote to establish it in Montreal? Is it not rather to his influence that we must attribute the fact of its being taken to what may almost be termed the back woods. Mr. Rose having sacrificed so much of his reputation for consistency to uphold the Government, must be supposed to exercise some influence with them as an offset. He was in England when the Confederation scheme was consummated, yet we are not aware that he ever employed that influence even to bring the local legislature to Montreal, or to prevent our receiving the nickname, as it may be called, of the Province of Quebec. Instead of assuming a manly stand on the floor of Parliament, Mr. Rose has shown himself to be the ready follower of the old Tory Government through all its jobs, and corruptions, and “unholy coalitions,” ever since he became the representative of the most important and influential Division of Montreal. That he is determined to regard the calls of party as infinitely more binding than the interests of his constituents has been abundantly shown in the past, and that he will continue the same course in the future that he [has?] pursued hitherto, there is, we fear, no room to doubt. Looking then to Mr. Rose’s past political career, and his gross inattention to the demands of his constituents, we find ourselves again asking for a reason why he should continue any longer to hold the nominal position of representative of Montreal Centre. Is it possible that amongst the mercantile men of this Division there cannot be found one willing to come forward and serve his fellow-citizens as a true representative of commercial interests in the future House of Commons? Now is the time for such to present themselves and we do not think there will be any great difficulty in making a selection.