Document Information

Date: 1866-05-08
By: Prince Edward Island (House of Assembly), Heath Haviland
Citation: Prince Edward Island, House of Assembly, The Parliamentary Reporter; or, Debates and Proceedings of the House of Assembly of Prince Edward Island, For the Year 1867, 23rd Parl, 1st Sess, 1867 at 151-156.
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).
Note: Haviland’s speech was accidentally omitted in the 1866 printing and was reprinted in the following year’s Reporter (1867)

Click here to view the rest of Prince Edward Island’s Confederation Debates for 1867.

SPEECH OF THE HON. T. HEATH HAVILAND, ON CONFEDERATION.

1866.

• (p. 151 in the primary document)

THE following speech of the Thomas Haviland [Georgetown and Royalty, Solicitor General], was, owing to some oversight of the Reporter for the Session of 1866, omitted from the Parliamentary Reporter of that Session:—

TUESDAY, 8^th May, 1866

Confederation Question.

House in Committee of the whole on Despatches, &c. John Yeo [2nd Prince] in the Chair.

Thomas Haviland [Georgetown and Royalty, Solicitor General] thought the hon. member from East Point [Emanuel McEachen] in his attempt to draw an argument against the proposed or contemplated Confederation of the British American Provinces, from the history and results of the Union between England and Scotland, had been peculiarly unfortunate. That hon. gentleman seemed to have inherited all the ancient animosity of his blood and race to the power and domination of the Saxon; and, altogether ignoring the happy change for his country, which, in the course of time, had been brought about by that Union—a change from discord to friendship, from war to peace, and from poverty and distress to national prosperity,—in attempting to strengthen his anti-confederate position by reference to it, he seemed to be animated solely by the recollection of what, in truth, was considered by the great majority of the people of Scotland, at that crisis of her fate, to be an annihilation of her independence, a loss and a disgrace, and a surrendering of her rank among nations, for no advantages which could be anticipated, except such as might be obtained by private individuals, whose hopes of self-aggrandizement and pecuniary gains completely stifled in their breast every consideration of national honor. Such views as these, with reference to the contemplated Confederation under consideration, appeared to be entertained, not only by the hon. member from East Point [Emanuel McEachen] but, indeed, by almost every other anti-confederate in the Island. The cry raised by our anti-confederates in general was, that by Confederation, we would be deprived at once of all the consideration and advantages of a resident and independent government; and for the prospect and benefits of free trade and extended commerce, which were held out to lure us into the connection, all we would realize would be increase of taxation burdens, and duties, wholly ruinous to our prosperity, and that altogether for the relief and benefit of Canada. The only advantages, it was, most unjustly and ungenerously, said by anti-confederates, which would result to Province Edward Island, from her being included in the contemplated Confederation, would be experienced by a few of her politicians who, for the rewards of venality, had agreed to barter away their own honor and the rights and liberties of their country. By those who thus, perversely, and he might say dishonestly, argued, it was most carefully kept out of sight that, according to the proposed scheme of Confederation, there would be no degradation of any of the Provincial Legislatures and Governments. These, on the contrary, would be preserved intact; and each Province would retain the entire control and management of its own local and internal affairs. It was true, indeed, that the general Government would, undoubtedly, and of necessity, exercise supervision of the individual States; but the power of the Federal Government to interfere with the exclusively internal affairs of any of the Confederated Provinces, would be of the most limited and inconsiderable character. In all the arguments brought to bear against Confederation, it was also very carefully kept out of view that its accomplishment, upon terms fair and just to every section of it—and upon no other terms did he wish, or had he ever desired, to see it established—would not only be the means of happily extinguishing those little waspish political feuds and jealousies which had so long acted as a drag upon our progress, and been a disgrace to us as a people; but would also, by putting the impost duties and other sources of public revenue, upon a uniform basis, under the control of the Federal Government, put an end to the anomaly of separate customs establishments, and the conflicting and perplexing commercial regulations which existed, and which had almost of necessity arisen out of the disunited state of these Provinces. Again, the recognition of another benefit which would result from a Union of these Provinces, had been carefully eschewed by our Island anti-confederates: he meant identity of laws, and uniformity in the modes of their administration. The

• (p. 152 in the primary document)

existence within territories of the same nation—territories lying near to one another, alike in climate, natural productions, and the social condition of their inhabitants—the existence, he said, within such territories of a multiplicity of laws, each having a distinct, local application upon almost every question of human rights; and of a plurality of courts—each peculiarly constituted, and having its peculiar rules of practice—administering those laws, hampered the ordinary administration of justice, tended to the promotion of crime, and seriously inconvenienced commercial intercourse between the various parts of these territories; and the desirability of the contemplated Confederation was, in his opinion, greatly heightened by the certain prospect which it afforded of the removal of these grievous anomalies by means of judicious and remedial action on that score by the Federal Legislature. Independent local legislation in each of a group of Provinces or Territories so circumstanced was, in some, and those too very important, respects, a positive evil; for it could not but result in difference of laws productive of such evil results as those to which he had just adverted; and such legislation had the additional evil effect of cherishing those local prejudices and feelings of separate interest, which tend so decidedly to the estrangement of each member of a Confederation from its fellows. The Island anti-confederates had—most unjustly and ungenerously, he was again constrained to say—declared, again and again, that such of our public men as advocated Confederation had been won over to that advocacy by the corrupting influence of Canadian gold, and had basely, with a view to their own individual aggrandizement and enrichment, agreed to barter away our priceless Constitution. The charge of bribery, which had thus been boldly preferred against such of the Island Deputies to Canada as had openly avowed and advocated their convictions in favor of Confederation, were beneath contempt or notice, although it would be easy to reply that perhaps American silver or greenbacks, had not been without their corrupting and denationalizing effect amongst the anti-confederates. And he might ask these most unscrupulous calumniators, if they would dare to say that the venerable Archbishop Connolly and Bishop McKinnon, the gallant General Williams, the veteran General Doyle, or Sir James Hope, who periled his life at the storming of the Petho Forts, in China, had been bribed into an advocacy of the projected Confederation of [Illegible] Provinces?—for one [Illegible] all of those eminently good and great men were, he was proud and happy to say, numbered amongst the most strenuous advocates of that great project. He thought not. But as to the ridiculous assertion that the advocates of Confederation were prepared to sacrifice our priceless Constitution for the establishment of a Federal Union, it was sufficient to refer to the terms of the Quebec Scheme of that Union, which showed most clearly that nothing was further from the minds of the Delegates who sat in the Quebec Conference than the sacrifice of their respective Provincial Constitutions. The powers which, by that Scheme, if caried into effect, would be given to the Federal Legislature were such as would neither require, nor necessitate, a nullification of the several separate Provincial Constitutions, although separate legislation under those several Constitutions would certainly be restricted to certain classes of subjects, and confined within narrower limits than those which originally circumscribed their operation; and so happily controlled would it be by the General Government or Federal Parliament, that no rivalry of interests could spring up between different Provinces. A reference to the Union of Scotland with England, as made by the hon. member from East Point [Emanuel McEachen], so far from yielding arguments against the Confederation of the British American Provinces, afforded the strongest in favor of it. The great benefits of that national treaty had been generally felt and acknowledged for the last hundred years. From the period of its accomplishment, there was awakened, in Scotland, a spirit of industry and enterprise formerly unknown in that country; and, ever since, the two kingdoms of England and Scotland, incalculably to their mutual benefits, have been gradually forgetting their former subjects of discord, and uniting cordially, as one people, in the improvement and defence of their common country—the island which they inhabit. Scotland’s greatest grievance, arising out of the Union, was that which she felt in the deprivation of her native and independent legislature, and her metropolis’ ceasing to be the abode of royalty; and, indeed, the restoration of their national parliaments was yet eagerly desired by large sections of the populations of both Scotland and Ireland. Under Confederation, however, each of the Provinces would retain its own Legislature and Government, for the management of its own local affairs, limited in power only to such an extent as would prevent its operating in favor of its own prosperity at the expense of any of the others. Of the advantages of Union, the United States, since their attainment of independence—notwithstanding their late disastrous dislocation and narrow escape from complete dismemberment—afforded the most conclusive evidence, by their increase in area, wealth, and physical strength, having progressed, in each of these particulars, to such an extent as has excited the wonder and admiration of the world.—Some of our Island anti-confederates had exercised their wit and talents in disparagement and ridicule of “the glory argument,” as it was called: but, for his own part, he did not think that any man, either could truly be said to have a country, or to deserve to [Illegible] one, who could not rejoice and glory in the patriotic and ennobling recollection of ancestral virtues and renown. They who laughed at the glory argument knew [Illegible] what had enabled Great Britain to blast that the sun never sets upon her dominions and that the sound of her drums has always been, either the prelude to victory, or the announcement of its glorious accomplishment. Under the glorious rule of Britain he was born, and under it he would die. To Anglo-Saxon genius no secrets of science were inscrutable; and to Anglo-Saxon perseverance, enterprise, skill, and bravery, nothing within the bounds of human power was unattainable. The practicability of a Confederation of the Provinces and Territories of British North America, to their utmost extent and limits, into a great national power, is, with respect to geographical difficulties, fast ceasing to be regarded as a mere visionary idea. The empire of which it would form the foundation, would in extent, be inferior only to those of Russia, China, and Brazil, and, in commanding position, its advantages would be equal to those of all the three combined. The people of the United States has not been slow to perceive all that; and twice, with a view to a forcible annexation of these

• (p. 153 in the primary document)

Provinces to the territories of their Republic, had they invaded Canada. Their desire for that annexation is as strong as ever; they are only waiting for a favorable opportunity to again attempt its accomplishment; and the cheapest and most effectual means of preventing it would be to place the Provinces in a position to defend themselves—to give them that self-reliance, that compactness of physical strength, that unity of action, and increased dissemination and intensity of national feeling, which can be given to them by Confederation—and by Confederation only. The Imperial Government desired to see it accomplished; and willing as the Mother Country was to spend her blood and treasure in defence of these Provinces, so long as they continued faithful in their allegiance to her, and true to the glorious Constitution and glorious old Flag of England, her ministers certainly had a right to state their views upon the question. It had been said that the Despatches of the Hon. Mr. Cardwell, on the subject of defence, were meant to be a putting of the screw upon us. He however, did not look upon them in that light. If these Provinces were not true to their allegiance, and willing to defend themselves, according to their ability, there was an end of the compact, on the part of Great Britain, to defend them. That compact would cease the moment we refused to exert ourselves for the preservation of British institutions and British connexion. Should the Confederation, however, take place and its accomplishment afford Great Britain a satisfactory evidence of the willingness of the united peoples of those Provinces to listen to her counsels, and, if possible, to anticipate her wishes for their own benefit, she would probably be found ready to yield to them a largely increased share of national privileges attended, however, with proportional national responsibilities. Her expressed wish that these Provinces should take upon themselves, the charge of providing and sustaining the naval and military forces necessary to their security against internal disorder and foreign aggression, was proof positive of that. The bestowal that charge would alone, it could not be doubted, give to the Federal Government an important rank as a national Government, and would ensure to it a degree of moral weight, not only in every section of the Confederation, but also with foreign powers. It was not to be presumed, however, that the Federal Government, although, in some sense, it would be independent, could, without some very material modification of the relation of the Provinces to the Mother Country, be permitted the power of making war, and of concluding treaties of peace and commerce, on its own account, as the Government of an entirely independent country. The power of regulating the intercourse and relations of the Confederated Provinces would, on the contrary, be confined to such adjustment of trade and commercial intercourse and relations with foreign states, as could not be prejudicial, in any very material or aggressive degree, to the interests of Great Britain, and as would not involve her actual divesture of all authority over them. One of the greatest bugbears, however, which had been conjured up by our anti-confederates,

“to fright our isle from its propriety,”[1]

in its consideration of the great question, was the enormous amount of taxation which Confederation, if effected, would entail upon it. Baseless and ridiculous, as on that score he held the predictions and calculations of our anti-confederate prophets and financiers to be, he would not, then make any attempt to disprove or refute them; but would rest satisfied with merely observing that, should they become the chosen or accepted guides and counsellors of the people, the too probable effect would be that, whilst steering our vessel of state so as to avoid the rock, the Scylla of Confederation taxation, they would unavoidably, if not designedly, direct her course, so as to be engulfed by the Charybdis of American debt. That debt amounted to the most amazing and enormous sum of two thousand six hundred and thirty three millions of dollars. The prospect of being allowed to participate in that prodigious burthen could not, he thought, be openly and successfully held out as any very strong inducement to our people to prefer Annexation to Confederation, or to incline them voluntarily to withdraw themselves from the assured protection of the old and glorious Flag of Britain, in order to seek precarious and doubtful refuge beneath the Stars and Stripes. He would like some of those exact financiers, to whose calculations he had just referred, to show how much per head of our population, in the event of our annexation to the United States, the burthen of our proportionate share of that debt would amount. The prospect of its insignificance, as compared with that to which they would have to submit under Confederation, would surely be very inviting!—The Hon. Colonel Gray, in his eloquent and argumentative speech upon the question, which had, most deservedly been listened so with every evidence of respectful attention by both sides of the House, had, in one of his sentences, spoken as if he thought that the question of Confederation should have been made a Government question; and the Hon. the Leader of the Opposition [George Coles] had eagerly seized upon and echoed it, in the hope he [Thomas Haviland] imagined that it might prove an apple of discord.

John Gray [4th Queens] explained that his own acts, with reference to the question, at the time when he had the honor to be the Leader of the Government, were sufficient to prove that such could not be his opinion. From the first, he had looked upon the question as one, which could only be constitutionally decided by the voice of the people at the polls; and, both in his legislative and executive capacity, he had spoken and acted accordingly.

Thomas Haviland [Georgetown and Royalty, Solicitor General]—resuming his speech, said, he was glad to find the opinion of the Hon. and gallant Colonel, on that point, exactly coincided with his own; and such, indeed, he said, it was evident it must have been from the very inception of measures by the Government of the Colony for its due consideration; for the gentlemen who were chosen by it to represent the Island at the Quebec Conference, were selected so as fairly to represent the two great political parties of our little state. That Delegation was composed of the Hon. Colonel Gray, President of the Executive Council, the Hon. W. H. Pope, Colonial Secretary, and of the Hon. E. Palmer, Attorney General, as representatives of the Government or Conservative party; and of the Hon. F. Coles, Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. E. Whelan, who was not suspected of entertaining any great love for the Government, the Hon. Andrew McDonald, who had never been a conservative, and himself, [Thomas Haviland] who, at that time, was not a supporter of the Government, having, some time before, for reasons to which it was not then necessary

• (p. 154 in the primary document)

to refer) seceded from it. The Government, by thus taking care that the parliamentary opposition or minority should be fairly represented at the Conference, shewed that they had no intention of making the Confederation question a party one. The Governments of the other Provinces acted in the same fair and impartial manner; and men of every party and of the most conflicting political opinions were brought together in the Conference, for the purpose of considering whether, measures could not be devised for the greater security of our free institutions, for the consolidation of British power in these Provinces, and for the more thorough establishment and perpetuation therein of the ennobling and invigorating principles of the British Constitution. Well, indeed, might the Hon. the Leader of the Opposition [George Coles] say of the result of that Conference, as he did at Ottawa, that

“he thought they (the Delegates) had reason to congratulate themselves upon the labours of the Conference. That thirty-three men, representing the various political opinions of six different Provinces, could have assembled, and so amalgamated their opinions as to agree upon a Constitution, suited for that great Confederation, was something, he believed, such as the world has never seen before, and shewed that the Delegates were worthy of the position they held. He said this although there was no man more disappointed than himself with regard to some parts of that constitution; but, by mutual concessions, they had arrived at a result which they could all agree in supporting and submitting to the people; for he held that it must be submitted to the people. They must not force it on the people; they must endeavour to show them that it is for their benefit, and thus induce them to accept it.”[2]

The harmonious and happy result of the Quebec Conference had, by the Hon. the Leader of the Opposition, been very justly attributed, in a considerable measure, to liberal and wise concessions and compromise of individual opinions on the part of the several Delegates engaged in that Conference. He himself, as well as that hon. gentleman, had, for the sake of harmony and the general good, foregone some of his own opinions in that important Convention. For instance, he was strongly impressed with the opinion that, as in the Senate of the United States, all the sections of the Confederation should be equally represented in the Upper House—that the greatest in territorial extent and population, should not, in that branch of the Federal Legislature, be allowed a greater number of representatives, than any of the smaller or less populous sections; and, in the Conference, he urged his opinion to that effect; but, finding, from the strong opposition which was made to it, that, if he continued to press it, his doing so would not only retard the progress of the Convention towards a solution of the great problem under their consideration, but might even, in some considerable degree, mar the result of their deliberations, he forbore to insist upon it. Concession and compromise were necessary, not only to the formation, but to the good and efficient working, of every system of free government. They were not only necessary in the formation and maintenance of the governments of free states, but in that of every association for general purposes or mutual benefit; in that of banking companies, and all other such corporate bodies; nay, even in domestic government, for it was well known that peace and harmony of action could never prevail or he secured in any family, independently of mutual concessions on the part of husband, wife and children. The projected Confederation, continued the hon. and learned gentleman, had not been taken up as a Government question in any of the Provinces; neither could it, in any of them, have been so brought forward without a gross violation constitutional principles: for not one of the Governments then existing in the Provinces had attained its position thorough the support of a parliamentary majority, elected by the people directly for the purpose of either entertaining the question of Confederation, or of deciding concerning it in any way. He then, at some length, favorably reviewed the proceedings concerning the question which had taken place in Nova Scotia; and, in noticing the imputations of dishonesty and treachery which Nova Scotian anti-Confederates had so freely thrown out against the Hon. Mr. Tilley, for the course which he had pursued with respect to it, he fully justified the conduct of that hon. gentleman, and declared that, notwithstand all the base calumnies which had been directed against him, there was not a blot upon his escutcheon. He [Hon. Haviland] then entered into a pretty full recapitulation and review of the parliamentary and government proceedings, for and against Confederation, in New Brunswick, and concluded that part of his speech by saying, that the dissolving of the Assembly, on that question, in that Province, by Governor Gordon, in opposition to the views of his Cabinet, although an extreme exercise of the prerogative with which, as Her Majesty’s Representative, he was clothed, had yet been justified by the result. That arbitrary and unconstitutional proceeding, as it had been called, of Governor Gordon, had been commented upon with very great severity by our Island anti-Confederates; but he begged leave to remind them that a similar gubernatorial proceeding here, some years ago, had, by some of those anti-Confederates, been lauded and extolled as an act of most dignified, patriotic, and constitutional independence. He alluded to the time when Governor Bannerman, in opposition to, and in contempt of, the advice of his Council—although that Council was sustained by a large and respectable majority of the parliamentary representatives of the people—dissolved the Assembly, and called a new election. The result, in that case, having proved quite satisfactory to those who had laboured to induce the Governor to exercise the prerogative in so unusual a manner, great were their exultation and rejoicing thereat, and scarcely ever had it been referred to since, but the recollection of it had called forth from them a jubilant peal of their bells. When further commenting upon the recent changes in political sentiments, in New Brunswick, which were attributable to the agitation of the Confederation Question in that Province, the hon. and learned gentleman pronounced the highest eulogium upon the Hon. Mr. Wilmot, those character, he said, was above suspicion, and who, in the noblest and most disinterested spirit of patriotism, seeing that, if the peoples of these Provinces desired to retain their free institutions, to preserve to themselves, and transmit to their posterity, the principles and blessings of Britain’s glorious Constitution, and to have her glorious and protecting flag to continue to wave over them, they must strengthen their loosely existing fraternal relations by the stronger and firmer bonds of a federal union, he had cast from him the trammels of office, had resigned his seat in the cabinet, and nobly stood forward as one

• (p. 155 in the primary document)

of the most zealous and enlightened of the advocates of Confederation. The hon. and learned gentleman then proceeded to notice our Island Cabinet disagreement on the Confederation question; and, in doing so, argued that the existence of that disagreement evidenced no unworthiness or unfitness for his or their position on the part of any individual member or members of that Cabinet. The question of Confederation, on which they differed, being altogether an open one—a Question which, although it involved the interests of every class in the Colony, yet, most assuredly as parties now stand, could not be made a party one—every member of the Cabinet, as well as every member of the House, was, he said, perfectly free, without any regard to political position or party ties, to argue and vote for or against it, according to his own conscientious views of the question. In dwelling upon the fact of this Cabinet disagreement, the hon. and learned gentleman adverted to similar divisions which at different times, had arisen in the Cabinet of Great Britain; instancing amongst others, that which took place in the reign of George the Third, when the great Pitt was Premier; and also the misunderstanding between King William the Fourth and his prime minister, Lord Melbourne, in consequence of which His Majesty intimated to his Lordship, although sustained by a parliamentary majority, that he had no further need of his services, and was yet obliged afterwards to recall him. The hon. and learned gentleman’s object, in referring to these historical incidents, was the shew that such differences might arise and exist between members of the same Cabinet, and such misunderstandings occur, even between the supreme head of the Government and his Executive, without their necessitating any just condemnation of either of the disagreeing parties; as, in such cases, the disagreement might, and, perhaps, generally did, arise solely from an adherence, on each side, to the most conscientious convictions, or the most sincere desire for the preservation or promotion of the public welfare. And, in particularly addressing some of his observations on that subject to “his hon. friend, the Leader of the Opposition” [George Coles], the hon. and learned gentlemen took occasion to observe that the day which had unfortunately seen honest and hearty opponents in the political arena, veritable and undisguised enemies in private life, was happily gone by; and congratulated that hon. gentlemen and himself that now, however great the hostility which, on the floor of the Assembly, each might manifest to the public policy and political sentiments of the other, they could, at all times, meet as true friends both in the social haunts and in the private walks of life. In countries in which self-government did not prevail, political contests seldom failed to provoke the most rancorous illwill, and to give rise to the most uncharitable asperities; but where that form of government is established its happy operation, in equalizing both burthens and privileges, and in holding the balance even between contending aspirants for place and power had a most salutary weight in the repression of jealousy and ill-will; and its influences, where they had long been felt, seldom failed to induce the practices of forbearance and courtesy in parliamentary debates.—The hon. and learned gentleman then observed, that, in giving his support to the Resolutions in amendment, which had been submitted by the hon. member for St. Peter’s [Edward Whelan], he did not think it necessary to dilate upon the Quebec Scheme, or to advert with any particularity to what had taken place at the Quebec Conference; for all that he could say upon those topics he had said in the Session of 1865, and it was duly recorded in the Parliamentary Reporter of that year. Indeed he feared he had already trespassed too far on the time and patience of the House by iteration of much that he had formerly spoken upon the same question; but his apology was, that, as he still adhered to the sentiments respecting Confederation which he had formerly uttered, he had no choice between such iteration and his preserving a silence, which in the position which he occupied, might justly have been deemed both disrespectful and unwarrantable. He was certainly very sorry to feel himself obliged to vote against the Resolutions which had been submitted by the Hon. the Leader of the Government [James Pope]; but, at the same time, he could not refrain from saying he was extremely astonished that, in the middle of the nineteenth century, a declaration such as that which they contained could be deliberately submitted to “the collective wisdom” of the country—a declaration by which, should the House accept it, they would dare to presume upon an exercise of the divine attributes of prescience and omniscience. He was indeed sorry to find that hon. members on the Government side of the House, and on the independent benches, were, however, prepared to accept and declare any thing, rather than, in any way, admit the principle of Confederation. He was himself, however, prepared to vote for the Resolutions in amendment, submitted by the hon. member for St. Peter’s [Edward Whelan]; and how the Hon. the Leader of the Opposition [George Coles], with any regard to his reputation for political consistency—not to say honesty—could do otherwise, he [Thomas Haviland] could not imagine. If, when at Ottawa, he [George Coles] spoke conscientiously, he could not now, with any shew of consistency, vote for the Resolutions submitted by the Hon. the Leader of the Government; nay, as it might justly be said that, at Ottawa, he spoke with ten-fold more strength than any other of the Island Delegates, in favour of the Resolutions adopted at the Quebec Conference, to be consistent, he ought to oppose the Resolutions now submitted against Confederation with ten times greater energy than any other hon. member who is opposed to them. He like the Hon. Joseph Howe, had declared that the Confederation of the British American Provinces had been, if not the cherished dream of his childhood, yet a cherished conception of his own mind, the realization of which he had contemplated for years. How now then, when its realization certainly seemed more than a probability, could he, not only abandon the hopes of it, but actually do all that laid in his power to prevent it?—Once more, with contemptuous indignation, adverting to, and repelling, the charges of bribery and corruption, which, on account of his advocacy of Confederation, had been levelled against himself, the hon. and learned gentleman took occasion to say, that there was not a public man in Prince Edward Island who had devoted himself to the public service of his country in a manner which exhibited less consideration of self, than he had done. It could not be said that he had ever fattened or luxuriated upon the sweets of office. Long as he had faithfully adhered to the principles and fortunes of the Conservative party,—alike when in power and out of power,

• (p. 156 in the primary document)

—he had never, even when they were the supreme dispensers of place and emoluments, urged upon their attention a recognition of his services, with a view to exacting at their hands any thing like a pecuniary recompense for them; and neither had he received any such recompense, except that might be said to be so, which had recently been bestowed upon him, in a salary of £200 a year, for his professional services, as Solicitor General. No one could be actuated by a more disinterested and patriotic regard for the good of his country than he was, and had, he was bold to say, throughout the whole period of his public career, proved himself to be. An impartial review of his past public life, was, he felt confident, sufficient to exonerate him from every charge of venality and corruption; and, in the sacred ties of his home, he could, in the persons of his children, three sons and three daughters, point to the surest pledges of his fidelity and devotion; to the interests of his country; for, than the present and future welfare and happiness of his children, nothing, save the holy obligations of duty and rectitude of life, could be dearer to his affections, or more precious in his estimation; and that welfare and that happiness, he was deeply and firmly persuaded, could not, by any means to which it was possible for him to have recourse, he so likely to insure to them, as by steadfast adherence to the principles and practice of social morality and public integrity. The hon. and learned gentleman then, in proceeding to the close of his speech, gave additional effect to his own arguments in favor of Confederation, by citing the sentiments concerning it of Lord Durham and Mr. Charles Bulwer, and of Mr. Oliphant, the private Secretary of Lord Elgin; and, after having favourably commented thereon at some length, concluded by again simply saying he would support the amendment submitted by the hon. member for St. Peter’s [Edward Whelan].

R.B. IRVING, REPORTER.

[1] William Shakespeare, Othello, 2.3.176-177.

[2] “The Dejeuner (at Ottawa),” in The Union of the British Provinces, ed. Edward Whelan (G. T. Haszard, 1865), https://primarydocuments.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/UnionofBritishProvinces1865.pdf. 139.