Province of Canada, Legislative Assembly, Journals of the Legislative Assembly, Address in Reply, Representation by Population Amendment (8 February 1859)
By: Province of Canada (Legislative Assembly)
Citation: Province of Canada, Legislative Assembly, Journals of the Legislative Assembly, 1859 at 33-34.
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).
The House resumed the said adjourned Debate.
And the Question being put on the Amendment to the said proposed Amendment; the House divided; and it passed in the Negative.
And the Question being again proposed on the Amendment to the original Question;
Mr. Archambeault moved, in amendment to the said proposed Amendment, seconded by Mr. Coutlée, That the words “the fundamental principle of the representative system, and one of the most important advantages resulting from it, is the right of the majority to have their views and opinions prevail in the administration of the country; and it is the duty of this House to repel any attempt which might endanger a principle which for centuries has preserved, in a wise measure of prostress, the franchises and liberties of England. That, in declaring on the 28th July last, “that in the opinion of this House, the City of Ottawa ought not to be the permanent Seat of Government of this Province,” this House, without intending any want of respect to the Sovereign, expressed its views and opinions on the subject of the Seat of Government in the ordinary and constitutional exercise of its privileges,” be left out, and the words “the Legislature of Canada having resolved that a fixed Seat of Government should be selected, and having solicited Our Gracious Queen, by an Address of either House, to exercise Her prerogative in making, such selection,—and an Act, moreover, having been passed, adopting beforehand the decision of Her Majesty, and appropriating the necessary funds,—we agree with His Excellency that the Act of the Canadian Parliament and the decision of the Queen are binding on the Executive Government of the Province, but that we regret that Her Majesty has not been advised to select the City of Montreal rather than the City of Ottawa, and that we therefore respectfully take the liberty to submit to Your Excellency, that it is the opinion of this House that an Address be presented to Her Majesty to represent that this House humbly prays Her Majesty to reconsider the selection she has been advised to make of a future Capital of Canada, and to name Montreal as such future Capital,” inserted instead thereof;
And the Question being put on the Amendment to the said proposed Amendment; the House divided: and the names being called for, they were taken down, as follow:—
Cartier, Atty. Gen.
Macdonald, Atty. Gen.
Macdonald, Donald. A.
Macdonald, John S.
McDonald, A. P.
Scott, Richard W.
So it passed in the negative.
And the Question being again proposed on the Amendment to the original Question,
And a further Debate arising thereupon;
Ordered, That the Debate be adjourned.
Then, on motion of the Honorable Mr. Cauchon, seconded by Mr. Dorland,
The House adjourned.
1 Comment »