Document Information

Date: 1865-08-15
By: Province of Canada (Parliament), Morning Chronicle
Citation: “Provincial Parliament. Legislative Assembly. Tuesday, Aug. 15th” [Quebec] Morning Chronicle (16 August 1865).
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).
Note: All endnotes come from our recent publication, Charles Dumais & Michael Scott (ed.), The Confederation Debates in the Province of Canada (CCF, 2022).

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

TUESDAY, AUGUST 15, 1865[1]

Committee of Supply—Explanations of Ministerial Policy

On the motion being called

For the House in Committee to consider a resolution “that a supply be granted to Her Majesty, and that part of His Excellency’s speech relating to a supply referred.”

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga] asked for explanations of ministerial policy in connexion with the various important subjects which formed the object of the mission to England[2].

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance] said that his hon. friend the Hon. Attorney-General East [George-Étienne Cartier] would give answers to these questions.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—I have no objection to answer all the questions, each one in its distinct order; and I think the information I shall give will comprise everything that hon. gentlemen opposite would like to be informed of[3]. Firstly, on the subject of Confederation, the Government are not prepared to recommend any further action to Parliament this session.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—Secondly, it is not the intention of the Government to introduce any measures for the construction of fortifications this session, nor is it intended to expend the vote of a million dollars passed last session before again meeting Parliament.

Some Hon. Members—Oh, oh, and laughter.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—Thirdly, the whole subject of the militia in all its branches is now undergoing a strict revision under the efficient officer who has been appointed Adjutant General, and it is not expected the Government will be prepared this session to reconsider the provisions of the Militia Act[4], though possibly some minor amendments may be required.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and cheers.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—The estimates of the militia service are now being prepared, and, when submitted, will explain the action to be taken by the Government pursuant to the understanding entered into in London on the subject. Fourthly—The subject of the Reciprocity Treaty[5] has been and is still engaging the anxious consideration of the Government. Under the authority of the Imperial Government, a meeting of delegates from the British North American Provinces, under the presidency of the Governor General, entitled a Confederate Council to advise on trade and commerce, will meet at Quebec[6], next on trade and commerce, will meet at Quebec, next month, with the view of arranging for united action in regard to the Reciprocity Treaty.

As this Conference is to take place shortly, it is not at present considered advisable to indicate the policy of the Government, further than to state that we are prepared to enter into negotiations with the American Government, on the most liberal and friendly terms, in this matter. Fifthly—The Government have no occasion to make an application to Parliament on the subject of the Intercolonial Railway. They can but reiterate the declaration already made by the Parliament of Canada, that they regard the construction of the Intercolonial Railway as a necessary accompaniment and condition of Confederation.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—In answer to an interruption from the Opposition, the hon. gentleman continued: We think our journey to England will conduce more to the construction of the Intercolonial Railroad than the celebrated mission to England[7]—

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—What mission? The last mission?

Some Hon. Members—Laughter, cheers and counter-cheers.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—The hon. gentleman mentions the last, but he knows well I refer to the former mission. Well, in addition, it is the intention of the Government to bring the question of the North-West Territory before Parliament this session.

Christopher Dunkin [Brome]—It is on, is not?

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—It is. As the delegates to England were not prepared absolutely to undertake that a loan with regard to this subject would be applied for, the Committee of the Imperial Cabinet did not consider it advisable to enter into details on this subject; but intimated their desire would be to arrange all the terms both as regards the period of the loan, rate of interest, sinking fund in the manner that would best promote the interest of the province. In conclusion, it is not intended to make any material alteration in the customs, excise or stamp duties this session.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga] said the Hon. Attorney General East [George-Étienne Cartier] had read a document to the House[8]. Now what conclusions were we to draw therefrom?

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East] said his answer was very explicit. He had just read the document, and the hon. member might draw any conclusion from it that he pleased. His conclusions, however, did not afford anything for him (Mr. Cartier) to reply to.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay] said the Government’s explanations were a worthy continuation of that system of shame and impostures that had been inaugurated since last session—it was an evidence that this much-vaunted expedition to England had result in ignominious failure, or in a ridiculous fiasco. What were the circumstances under which it was undertaken? When the scheme of Confederation received the first serious check—when, by the refusal of the people of New Brunswick to hear of a union with the other provinces[9], and especially with Canada, all idea of the practicability of the confederation of the provinces had to be dismissed. The Ministry, finding their scheme had received its death-blow, found suddenly there was an imminent exigency for their going to England to discuss certain questions referred to in the papers before the House[10]. They found there was danger of a war with the States.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—They were receiving despatches by every mail representing the urgency of some steps being taken for the defence of the country. We, of the Opposition, told them they were far mistaken; and that there was no danger of a war; that the cry of “war” was a mere shallow pretence on the part of the Government to enable them to avoid the difficulties of their position.

The Ministry, however, must proceed to England straightway, to make arrangements for the defence of the country; but they desired, however, as the principal object to make arrangements for Confederation. They would not tell us whether they were going to ask the Imperial Government to use coercive measures with the Governments of the Maritime Provinces to bring about their wishes. The delegation disclaimed all attempts at coercion.

He (Mr. Holton) would like to know whether they did not ask the Imperial Government to introduce a measure of Confederation notwithstanding the opposition of the Maritime Provinces[11]. He believed they did; and he believed that certain articles that had appeared in the English organs of Lord Palmerston were written by or on the instructions of members or a member of the delegation[12]. But they found the Imperial Government would not adopt their suggestions, which aimed at the very foundation of the rights of the colonists, for which Canadians themselves had struggled so long.

Finding, however, their action would not be sustained by the Imperial authorities, the Government realized that they had nothing more to do and nothing to submit to the House. The first of the objects which the Ministry professed to have at heart in the mission to England was Confederation, and the second was Reciprocity[13]. In respect to the letter, they were told they could do nothing in England; that Washington was the place where all the negotiations on this subject had hitherto taken place. Yet Ministers must go to England.

They were then told by Mr. Cardwell that he had already instructed Sir F. Bruce to open negotiations with the American Government on the subject. What occasion, then, was there for a journey to England in reference to this subject? They merely went there to learn the action of the Imperial Government in the premises, which was taken in pursuance of the urgent representations of the Government which preceded the last, and that they could do nothing whatever further.

Then, with respect to fortifications, the present Government felt something must be done, and that they must make sure the country would not be overrun at some unfortunate and unexpected moment. They must act immediately—Parliament could not sit a day longer; the supplies could not be voted—preparations must be made for the defence of the country.

But, though in such a hurry, Ministers waited a month after prorogation of Parliament before starting for England, in half of which time the necessary and unfinished business of the session might have been completed, and this session saved. But they have been completed, and this session saved. But they came back with a report[14], and stated that the Imperial Government would undertake to repair the fortifications of Quebec, a fact we knew before they left for England.

The British Government had submitted to the House of Commons, some time before Parliament was prorogued[15], a scheme, showing that that was all they were going to do. They proposed, moreover, to allow us to build fortifications elsewhere, should they be wanted, on sufficient and ample security being given for the payment of the loan they would give us for those works.

He would like to know something if the nature of the security to be exacted for the loans to be advanced us. He would confine himself, in his further remarks, to the main points of the mission and its results. They got a statement from the Imperial Government that they would fortify Quebec, and an intimation that, if any other fortifications were to be constructed, they must be at the expense of the Provincial Government, and the money required therefore must be raised by loan guaranteed by the former, provided the security were ample. But what was the condition of affairs now? Now, quoad[16] the third object which took Ministers to England, they had reached no result on which they dared to invite the action of the House during this session.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers and counter-cheers.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—He repeated the country had been the victim of the hugest system of imposture by men pretending to deserve the intelligent confidence of the people.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers and dissent.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—We had yesterday a statement submitted of the expenditure under the vote of credit of last session. Among other extraordinary facts connected with this mission to England was that of the vote of credit instead of the ordinary supplies. It was pointed out to hon. gentlemen that the taking of this vote would, in effect, be an abrogation of the Government’s credit bill of last year. He thought it would be seen by the accounts that we had here items which exceeded in amount of unprovided items brought under the notice of Parliament at any session since 1854.

He thought they would find that the items which had been provided for out of this open vote of credit, for which no appropriation existed, were in excess of the appropriations for particular services. He thought it would be found the amount would aggregate in a sum not far from $300,000 expended, and which had not been specially contemplated by Parliament, and in spite of the credit bill which was to prevent expenditures of money without the sanction of Parliament. Thus, it would be seen that the wisdom of the course he asked the House to pursue in opposition to this credit has been evidenced by the result.

(The hon. gentlemen here proceeded to comment upon the various items of expenditure included in the vote of credit.)

He said we had first $12,459 of arrears of salaries, and this was one of the results of the financial management of a Government of which the great of champion of economy and opponent of corruption (Hon. Mr. Brown) was a member. The next item was one of $5000 for payment of additional employees. During the last three months after Parliament was dismissed, the Government had disbursed, under this vote of credit some $6000 as salaries of additional employees, besides the $12,000 of arrears of salaries which they paid without the previous consent of Parliament, under, probably, the civil services act, which they and their predecessors had treated as a dead letter.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—In addition, Beauport Lunatic Asylum had receive $15,000 in excess of the sum deemed ample by Parliament. Thus, during the last three months of the last fiscal year this enormous sum, without any previous estimate, or report upon what the demand for this sum was founded, being laid before Parliament, was appropriated for the purpose in question. Then there was $10,000 appropriated for the Trinity House at Montreal— it was utterly inexplicable, as he was sure it was unwarrantable.

(The honorable gentleman concluded by taking exception to other items, including the post-office one of $82,000, and that for Crown Lands and general expenditure, contending there was in the latter an excess during the last three months of the last fiscal year of $38,000 over the appropriation of last year, which excess had not received the sanction of Parliament. He sat down amid loud Opposition cheers.)

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council] said that if anything were necessary to prove the success of the mission to England[17] the exhibition which the hon. gentleman had just made would establish it. He was not only content with going over the figures and commenting upon them from his own point of view—and he (Mr. B.) desired to say that the hon. gentleman dare not state such things when the public accounts were brought before us— but had ventured to make statements for which there was no foundation whatever.

Some Hon. Members—Ministerial cheers.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—He had ventured to charge members on the Treasury benches with fraud, deception and imposition on the country. He (Mr. B.) threw back those charges with indignation and contempt. He apprehended there had never been one word addressed to this House by the Administration of which he was a member that was not strictly true, and there had not been one word uttered by it otherwise than honorably and fairly.

The member for Chateauguay [Luther Holton] had said this and that sum was spent by the Government. We were entrusted by this House with the expenditure of two millions, and had spent it to the best of our judgment, under that responsibility we owed to the country and the House. He presumed that when the estimates came down we would be able to show the public we had not departed from the original intention in this regard to the extent of a shilling. He could only say, as far as he knew anything of the proceedings of the Government, that the law of the proceedings of the Government, that the law had not in this matter been departed from to the extent of a shilling.

Well, besides the member for Chateauguay [Luther Holton] declared the mission to England was a failure. But what did he want? Was it to come here and propose measures for defence? Did he want us to say millions should be spent for that purpose? He (Mr. B.) was bound to say that he had never been willing to spend a large sum for defences. It might, however, be necessary to spend money for this purpose, and he was ready to vote for the expenditure of all the money that might be required for such works. He did rejoice in the hope— and it was one of the objects he desired to obtain—of getting along peaceably with our neighbors, and with that hearty understanding we had established with the British Government, he anticipated in doing so without the expenditure of vast sums of money.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—Instead of trying to add to our embarrassment, the hon. gentleman should be as desirous as we that this good understanding which has been established between the Home Government and ourselves should be allowed to continue, without throwing such remarks across the House. He said we had come back without accomplishing anything. Did he charge us with doing any wrong in England?

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—Yes.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear and dissent.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—The hon. gentleman presumed to state that we had applied to the Home Government for coercive measures against the Maritime Provinces. He (Mr. Brown) was able to say there was not a word of truth in the assertion.

Some Hon. Members—Ministerial cheers.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—Not a shadow of truth.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—On the contrary, it was repeated again and again by the deputation that they did not in the least desire that nay coercive measures should be applied as against the Lower Provinces.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—The hon. gentleman attacked the Government upon something that appeared in London newspapers. Now, who cared for what appeared in them or in Canadian newspapers. But when he stated that some of the papers here used language that gave him to suppose that coercive measures had been proposed, he made statements in this House on very loose authority. Again he stated we had done nothing in regard to reciprocity[18]. How could he know? If he felt the interest in it he ought, he would know it was a very delicate question to deal with. The House would readily believe we were quite as alive to the importance of getting the treaty renewed as he was. He thought the member for Chateauguay [Luther Holton] would find that no stone had been left unturned to have the treaty renewed on terms favorable to this country. He did hope that the time would come when members of the House, acting in a national spirit, would lay aside those miserable reproaches which we must feel ought not to be made when, in such important questions as this, we approached negotiations with a great country like the United States.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—He believed the honor and commercial interests of the country had been fully regarded in the negotiations hitherto, and that such would be the rule henceforth also. The Government had no question upon which they had acted more earnestly, and with a more hearty desire for the interests of the country than on this question of Reciprocity. The hon. member for Chateauguay (Mr. Holton) asked what were the guarantees for the debentures, and what were the securities, and so forth, for the proposed loan.

He (Mr. Brown) did think that if the hon. gentleman could have seen the way in which the Imperial Government had acted generally, he would not have spoken as he had on the present occasion. Nothing could be more handsome than the way they dealt with us in the matter of the guarantee.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—What is it?

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—The hon. gentleman will see that a matter of that sort must be put in the general document. When our finances were explained, he believed they gave entire satisfaction to the members of the Imperial Government; and he believed no question would be raised in England, in regard to the security of Canada for the loans in question. The contest to give the guarantee to Canada, after refusing it to other colonies showed great generosity towards us, and it ill-became hon. members to insist that the guarantee in question was given in an insincere way, and that the Imperial Government were trying to get some means of sliding out of the original bargain. He thought the hon. gentleman had allowed expressions to drop which—had he known the circumstances—would not have escaped him.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—The hon. gentleman had spoken of the Hon. Minister of Agriculture [Thomas D’Arcy McGee], and of the possibility of getting information from him upon a certain subject, “if he appeared again.” If he (Mr. Holton) had known that that hon. gentleman was laboring under severe sickness, he would probably not have spoken as he did.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—The hon. member had further said that nothing had come out of the north-west question. It might be true that he had no sympathy with it; but that applied to other questions also—such, for instance, as Confederation.

He (Mr. Brown) did not know but that the hon. gentleman was opposed to the Reciprocity Treaty[19] as well. But the hon. gentleman went farther, and said the Government did not succeed upon the defence question. He (Mr. Brown) apprehended that the delegates had succeeded—having established an understanding with the Imperial Government, by which it assumed a large portion of the burthen of our defence, never done before.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—This attack, often brought against Ministers, of not doing their duty for the defence of the country was altogether without cause. If we had done no more by our mission to England than to establish the present friendly feeling between the Imperial and Provincial Governments, the mission would well answer the purpose for which it was intended.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga] said that the hon. President of the Council (Mr. Brown) had not fairly met the arguments of the hon. member for Chateauguay [Luther Holton], who said that the Ministry had pledged themselves to prepare measures for the defences of the western portion of the Province, provided the guarantee of the Imperial Government were given, yet in the face of despatch, the hon. gentleman opposite stated that they were to do nothing about those fortifications. Why. then. did he go to England? Was not that the main object of the mission?

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council] said that with regard to what he stated respecting the defence of the country, he was unwilling that other languages should be put in his lips than that which he had uttered. He desired to have it understood that he did not think the danger of war with the United States was imminent, and therefore he was not in favor of launching into large military expenditure; but, coupled with that, he wished it to be known, that he was, above all things, in favor of the connexion with Great Britain.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—He put this in the forefront of his political principles.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—He believed that peace and war being committed to the Imperial Government. it was our duty to act in concert with it, if we wished to maintain the connexion. He did think that the unprotected position in which we had been placed, in the last few years, had tended greatly to diminish our feeling of security, and create one of uncertainty with respect to our finances. It was necessary we should come to a conclusion with the Imperial authorities as to what was required of us as our share of duty in the matter of defence, and that the accusations as to our not having done our duty should be dispelled for ever, and that we should come to a complete understanding in the matter, as well with the people of this country as with the Government of Great Britain. It was much to be rejoiced at that, with the full consent of the Imperial Government, they have placed the demand upon us for an expenditure of money in such a position that it would not come upon us immediately.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall] did not see that the statements made threw any light upon the subject. The Government had failed in the schemes it had undertaken, and he did not see that the country had gained by their accession to office. The hon. gentleman proceeded to condemn the various act of the Government and its general policy.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance] hoped he would be permitted to offer a few explanations as to the attack made by the hon. member in reference to the course taken by the Government respecting the vote of credit of last session. He thought the House would agree with him when he said it was not the most convenient course for hon. gentlemen in Opposition to make violent attacks upon the Government. But, at the same time, the Government did not shrink from them. They were aware of the disappointment existing on the part of the Opposition, which led them to make, whenever they had an opportunity, attacks upon Government, and thus venting their spleen[20] upon those who composed it.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—The hon. gentleman (Mr. Holton) has evidently “torn his passion all to tatters,”[21] and he (Mr. Galt) was not surprised at it. He attacked the Government with regard to the Audit Act[22], but he (Mr. Galt) did not hesitate to any that in no instance had its provisions been departed from.

In the next place, he (Mr. Galt) maintained that, under the vote of credit taken, a large portion of that vote—some three hundred and thirty thousand dollars—he thought for Frontier Militia, and fifty thousand dollars for the St. Albans banks[23] were voted in specific sums; and though the Government were desirous of offering the fullest information regarding them, still it must be remembered they were specific appropriations.

But in regard to the vote for the Frontier Militia[24], the House would find it was expressly stated that the sum was to provide for payment up to the 1st of May. It would be remembered it was also stated that it would be necessary to bring down supplementary estimates if this force were to be maintained after the 1st of May. The consequence was that, instead of the Government spending the sum placed at its disposal, the had expended a smaller one.

He would now refer to the vote respecting the money taken by the St. Albans’ raiders; of course the Government directed the payment of that money, and if there was one thing that could have excited his surprise more than another, it was that hon. gentlemen like the hon. member for Chauteauguay (Mr. Holton) who were, par excellence, the self-constituted friends of the Northern States, and of Canadian connexion with the Northern States, should have taken exception to the course pursued by the Government in this matter.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—Who are they?

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—Yourself, and the hon. member for Hochelaga (Mr. Dorion) are those who have claimed to represent the interests of the United States par excellence.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—Never!

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—Did you not?

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—I claim to have been a friend of the Northern States, but I also claim to have been no friend of any country so much as my own.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance] said there was nothing libelous in saying that the hon. gentleman was interested in the Northern States. He (Mr. Galt) never charged that gentleman with having preferred the interests of these States to those of Canada, but he said this—that he was throughout the late rebellion, one of those who stated most prominently that the North should prevail. And what did he come forward today, to say? It was to charge the Government with having acted remissly—with having come forward and made up a loss said to arise from an erroneous decision of the courts.

He (Mr. Galt) held that it was perfectly competent for himself to enquire upon what motives such a charge was brought, and to ascertain whether we had acted in the interests of this great country, or in a way to imperil our friendly relations with the United States, which we had been charged with interrupting. To maintain these good relations, he (Mr. Holton) held that the Government should have refused payment of the money taken from the St. Albans’ banks[25].

The Government, on the other hand, urged that it would not be for the public interest to say what would be done in case a particular judgment were rendered. The Government repudiated in the strongest terms any desire to mislead the House upon the question, or go beyond the intention of the House, which was that the sum of money in question should be paid to those parties if justice were not done by the ordinary tribunals of the country.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and oh, oh.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—He would now refer to charges brought against the Government respecting other items. He thought the House would recollect that $30,000 were to be appropriated for the inter-colonial survey, and $5000 for the Dublin Exhibition.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—Nobody complains of that.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance] said it was complained that the Government had expended money without authority. All the Government undertook to do was to spend as little of the sum granted under the vote of credit as possible; and he thought it could be easily shewn that the Government had acted up to that promise. The hon. gentleman then went on to defend in detail some of the other items objected to, including that of $5,000 for extra employees stating that he believed they could give satisfactory explanations as to every employé taken on.

Regarding the whole contingencies go the public service, a much less sum than that contemplated by Parliament had been expended. The administration of justice, the extradition cases, the frontier force and the St. Albans’ raid, accounted for one million and a half of the vote. He thought the House was in possession of quite sufficient information to justify the conduct of the Government in this matter. The objections to item for the maintenance of the lunatics were unbecoming, and the hon. member for Chateauguay (Mr. Holton) had no right to say that it was an uncalled for outlay. With regard to the supplementary estimates, the Government had indicated, as early as the beginning of March, that they intended to ask the House for the supplementary votes for the several services.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—What about the $80,000 for Post Office service?

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance] said the hon. gentleman could not expect he (Mr. Galt) was going to analyze a single sum connected with that service without a moment’s notice. There was no doubt a portion of that item was due for railway service which had remained in arrear, and he count not, without time, give all the information regarding it. As he had already stated, the fact that could be ascertained in any way the House pleased was, that there had not been a single warrant issued for which the consent of the House had not been obtained.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—The Government was responsible on the manner in which that vote of credit was disposed of, and they were here to answer for it. They denied the right of hon. gentlemen opposite to charge them with any wrong-doing in a matter which would amount to a breach of duty. They were willing to take the responsibility of their act. They had administered the affairs of the country faithfully, and for their administration they stood responsible before this House and the country. As for the Government had been charged with having made an improper use of the vote of credit, why did not hon. gentlemen opposite refer to the fact that after Parliament had placed $2,380,000 at their disposal, the Government had left unappropriated $362,000. If they had desired to make an improper use of the money, was it to be supposed they would have left that sum standing at the credit of the public account?

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—It might suit the hon. members for Cornwall [John Sandfield Macdonald], Hochelaga [Antoine-Aimé Dorion] and Chateauguay [Luther Holton], to say that the mission to England[26] was a miserable failure. They would, he dared say, have thought it a great success, had the Government come here and plunged the country into excitement by stating that we had entered into no cordial understanding in reference to the policy we were pursuing—that these hon. gentlemen would have enjoyed our coming here and saying that the Government of England would not lend its moral support to the Confederation of the Colonies.

It was a light thing for them to say that Confederation had failed somewhere; but he (Mr. Galt) preferred taking the statements of others better acquainted with the Lower Provinces, who stated that they desired a union, and that it was sure to take place before long. The failure in the view of these honorable gentlemen was that we had not come back to cast again those sectional doubts and difficulties in the eyes of the people of this country, and to prolong a state of things which had entailed so much misfortune already. He (Mr. Galt) could understand why the hon. member for Cornwall (Mr. J.S. Macdonald) would like again to parade before this country his former political child and twice-abandoned offspring, the double majority[27].

Some Hon. Members—Cheers and laughter.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—He could well believe, from the remarks of the hon. member for Hochelaga (Mr. Dorion), that no one would have been more pleased to call forth anew those sectional feelings to which he referred, and the hon. member for Chateauguay (Mr. Holton) must have looked forward with longing to a certain amount of discontent and difficulty, that might have been supposed to arise here, and as being favorable to views which some impute to him. The country might be congratulated on the fact that the policy which this government was formed to carry out, had received the sanction of not merely the Imperial Government, but of all in England, from Her Majesty to the lowest newspaper.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—This was a subject upon which we did pride ourselves. We say that it is a matter of genuine pride that the policy we came together to carry out, has been so well received,— that it had obtained the approval the most leading minds of the old world, and he believed also of the United States. If we had met difficulties in carrying it out, which have, in some degree, prevailed in the Lower Provinces—if from the want of correct and sufficient information the scheme had not been adopted by New Brunswick[28]—we might, nevertheless, well rejoice at the position in which the question stands there within twelve months after it had been placed before the people. We were very confident that, so far from proving a failure, it would prove a marked success.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—Whatever the information of hon. gentlemen may be, our information leads us to believe that before the session of action leads us to believe that before the session of 1866 arrives, we shall be in a position to deal with the whole question of Confederation; and it was to be hoped in such a way as to be satisfactory to the West, as well as the East.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—So you said last session.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance] said it was only because the hon. gentleman found the ground slipping from under his feet that he rages as he does.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and laughter.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—Members would see his face radiant with smiles if he felt sure that what he asserted was true. He knew this Government has been honestly and successfully pressing forward the project with which they charged themselves; and it was because he felt that what was coming here long would consign him to the shades of Opposition that he, therefore, would rejoice at anything indicative of the failure of the plans of the Government.

Some Hon. Members—Hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—But it was not patriotic in him to cherish such sentiments, and if the Government were to fail, he (Mr. Holton) would see this country plunged into agitation and difficulties injurious to its interests in the highest degree. As the whole resources of men and means possessed by the mother-country are pledged for our defence—if there be any doubt in regard to the wishes of the people of Canada, on the subject of connexion with Great Britain, now was the time to discuss it.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—Let it not go forth to the world or to England that any doubt exists in our minds on the subject. If we were not justified in saying that Parliament would endorse our statement in regard to what Canada was willing to do, let it be known at the earliest possible moment. If we were justified, why should we be charged with not having proceeded in a proper and constitutional course in reference to this defence question? Was it not the part of wisdom in those charged with this matter to come to the present understanding with the Imperial Government, and thus for ever put an end to these accusation as to our unwillingness to do our duty in our defence. We have succeeded in removing the stigma from our reputation in this respect, and it is in the power of no one in England to charge us now with unwillingness to do what is right.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—We have done all the Imperial Government asked us. We were willing, under certain conditions set forth in the correspondence, to enter upon the construction of fortifications; but only to do so in the event of their being accompanied by such other measure on the part of the Imperial Government as would complete the system of defence for this country. It was no cause of regret to us that circumstances were such that the Imperial Government did not see fit to go to Parliament at once with a proposition of that kind. It is clear we were ready to do it; but the Imperial Government were not at that moment prepared for it.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—You asked them to put it off.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance]—We only asked them to put it off after it was stated they could not get it done this session. We said then— if a year must pass before legislation takes place on this matter, then within that time, we anticipate and hope that Confederation will take place. That being the case, it is precisely one of those questions which can be more properly decided by a Confederative Government than by that of the Province of Canada alone. Any one can see that the defence of Canada is only the defence of one-half the British Provinces on this continent. And while we felt, under the pressure of immediate difficulties and dangers, we were conscious we would be acting improperly if we did not ask the people of Great Britain to assist us, we did not regret if we were in a position to ask that the Canadian Government should be allowed to deal with that question. Hon. gentlemen opposite attacked the Government because it was proposed that the expenditure for the militia should be in accordance with the views of the Secretary for War [Earl de Grey and Ripon].

Now, the defence of this country must be a joint-defence. If we are to have the Imperial troops and the Imperial navies here, to defend us, it would be the greatest absurdity in the world to say we should not take advantage of Imperial advice, and act in accordance with their wishes regarding the means adopted for the organization and discipline of our militia. It shows the desire to utilize to the last shilling the means we seek for. There is no power taken from Parliament; and the militia estimates will, as usual, have to be voted every year. All the Government can do is to bring down such estimates as, according to their views, are likely to be useful in promoting the efficiency of the militia. The House will deal, from year to year, with these votes and estimates as they come down.

So far as the Secretary of War [Earl de Grey and Ripon] presuming to interfere in anything connected with our Militia is concerned, nothing of the kind was ever dreamed of; but it was considered necessary the Militia authorities should be in communication with the dignitary in question, in order to secure harmoniousness of action, and everything else required for the defence of the country. In accordance with the pledges given the Government frankly stated the course they desired to take on the measure referred to this evening; and so far from withholding information they actually gave it on matters not under discussion— such for instance as the announcement that it was not intended to make alterations in the customs, stamps and excise.—Apologizing to the House for the length of time he had occupied, the hon. gentleman sat down amid loud cheers.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East] said he had very few observations to make, in addition to the very able discourse which had just been uttered by his hon. friend the Finance Minister [Alexander Galt]. Hon. gentlemen opposite asserted that the mission to England was a complete failure; but in this they were entirely mistaken. Let them look back to the position of affairs a year ago, and compare it to that in which we stood at present, and then they could not but see—however much they might affect to deny it—that a vast amount of progress had been made in the interval.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—The mother-country had fully endorsed and sanctioned the scheme of Confederation. Its opponents hoped that the refusal of New Brunswick[29] to give it assent to the project would have been at once taken possession of by England in order to declare her hostility to the measure. In this, however, they were deceived—England, on the contrary, giving to the scheme the fullest and most unreserved approval.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—It should be borne in mind that it was the plan of Confederation adopted, after mature consideration by the Conference of Quebec, that was thus approved.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—Honorable gentlemen opposite would also find to their disappointment that it would be the self-same scheme which would be adopted were long by the Lower Provinces. It should be recollected that the Legislature of Nova Scotia had never expressed itself against Confederation[30].

Now as far as New Brunswick was concerned, there was a very strong and decided reaction in favor of the scheme. He (Mr. Cartier) repeated that the Government had a right to congratulate themselves upon the success of the mission to England[31]. We had the highest opinion as to the defensibility of the country; and we had further the assurance that England would, in case of need, devote her whole strength and all her resources to defence.

The hon. member for Chateauguay [Luther Holton] had made a very strong attack upon the Government in respect to the Reciprocity Treaty[32]. There was no cause for any attack, whatever, in this matter, for the hon. gentleman should not forget that we had obtained, in connection with the negotiations relative to the Treaty, the very great privilege of treating directly with the British Minister in Washington, Sir Frederick Bruce.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—Furthermore, as already stated, we were to have a conference of delegates from the other Provinces—to be called the Confederate Council[33]—a name which doubtless did not please hon. gentlemen opposite—on the subject of the Reciprocity negotiations.

Referring to the hon. member for Chateuguay (Mr. Holton) the hon. gentlemen went on to say that that hon. member had been named a delegate from Montreal to the Commercial Convention at Detroit[34], but he had shewn his regard for the trade relations between this and the adjoining country by “backing out” from the position in which he had been placed, and not going to Detroit.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and laughter.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—Instead of fulfilling the honorable mission entrusted to him, the hon. member remained quietly at home and occupied himself by hunting up the Journals of the House in order to find materials where with to concoct small speeches against the Government—for he repeated it they were small speeches.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and laughter.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—The hon. gentleman went on to say that of course he did not charge his hon. friend opposite (Mr. Holton) with complicity in Mr. Potter’s celebrated speech[35] or Mr. Wood’s equally celebrated letter[36].

Some Hon. Members—Cheers and laughter.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—Indeed the hon. member had, by letter, repudiated all connexion with the meeting of the friends of these gentlemen in Montreal[37].

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and oh, oh.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay] denied that he had written any such letter. The statement referred to by the Hon. Attorney General East [George-Étienne Cartier] had been made in a public journal and was untrue. Upon his indignant denial of that statement, the writer had, upon his own responsibility, retracted it at once.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East] went on to say that the very small class of persons who were supposed to favor the Wood-Potter movement[38] were the particular political friends of the hon. member for Chateauguay [Luther Holton].

It being six o’clock, the Speaker left the chair.

The Legislative Assembly adjourned for dinner recess.

After the recess, the gas in the chamber was very defective, for nearly half an hour, and a supply of candles had to be obtained.

When the Speaker took the chair—

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—I do not know whether the hon. gentleman (Mr. Cartier) is done.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—If the hon. gentleman wants gas he can go on himself.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter and cheers.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay] said he would endeavour to “illuminate” the hon. gentleman opposite.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—The hon. gentleman went on to comment upon the statements of the hon. Finance Minister [Alexander Galt] and the President of the Council [George Brown], respecting the alleged results of the mission to England[39]. In this connexion he alluded to an article which had appeared in the columns of the London Morning Post of the 14th June last, respecting the mission in question, and which was after wards copied into the Toronto Globe, with a caption setting forth that it was from “Lord Palmerston’s organ.”[40]

Now he (Mr. Holton) thought the article in question bore certain signs of being suggested or inspired by the Hon. President of the Council [George Brown], if indeed it did not proceed from his pen.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council] said the hon. gentleman was altogether in error, and did him (Mr. Brown) too much honor.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council]—He might even add that the question was not altogether placed before the public in the way he would have liked to place it.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay] said that he was not desirous of complimenting the hon. gentleman. On the contrary he thought the article in question was of rather an exceptionable character. It was not characterized by that extreme polish and courtesy which marked the productions of British journalists and which we did not always see in this country.—The hon. gentleman then went on at great length to comment upon the statements made by the Hon. Finance Minister [Alexander Galt] in reply to his (Mr. Holton’s ) assertions as also to those of the Hon. Attorney General East [George-Étienne Cartier]. He concluded by referring to the taunts thrown out against him for not attending the Detroit Convention[41], and explained the reasons which had induced him to abstain from attending.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East] said that the hon. member for Chateauguay (Mr. Holton) believed, no doubt, that such a small corporation as the Montreal Board of Trade had no claim upon his services, and that the city of Montreal had no claim upon him either, in as much as he did not represent any one of the divisions of the city.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and laughter.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—It was not illness that prevented the hon. gentleman from attending— neither was it the want of means of conveyance, in as much as the Grand Trunk, with accustomed liberality, offered to convey the delegates to the Convention free of charge, and he understood the Toronto Board of Trade had charged itself with the other expenses.

Some Hon. Members—Oh, oh, and laughter.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—The fear that his parliamentary duties would call him away could not have influenced the hon. gentleman, in as much as Detroit was so close to the western extremity of the Province represented by the hon. member for Essex [Arthur Rankin], that the Canada Gazette containing the proclamation calling Parliament together would reach him in a few hours, and he could come from Detroit to the Seat of Government by the Grand Trunk.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—The hon. member would doubtless have no objection to travel by the Grand Trunk, and more particularly over the section between Windsor and Toronto, in as much as he (Mr. Cartier) believed his hon. friend (Mr. Holton) had been the contractor for that portion of the road, and must, therefore, feel that he was perfectly safe in trusting his precious life to it

Some Hon. Members—Laughter and cheers.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—The hon. gentleman then went on to refer to the alleged meeting said to have been held in Montreal in favor of annexation[42].

Luther Holton [Chateauguay] said the Hon. Attorney General East [George-Étienne Cartier] had made this statement about the alleged meeting on his own responsibility. The hon. gentleman appeared to know something of the matter as he described the class of men who had attended that meeting.

Now if such a meeting had been held it was, he (Mr. Holton) did not hesitate to say it, an unlawful meeting, and the Hon. Attorney General East [George-Étienne Cartier] should declare explicitly all he knew about it. He (Mr. Holton) desired to say, on his honor as a member of Parliament, that he had no knowledge of such a meeting, that he had never met anybody who knew anything about it, and that he did not believe such a meeting ever took place.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East] said he had no personal knowledge of the alleged meeting, and he was quite willing to admit that the hon. gentleman knew far more of the movements of Messrs. Potter, Wood & Co[43]., than he (Mr. Cartier) knew, so that he was willing to accept the hon. member’s assertion.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers and laughter.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East]—But what he did say was this— that the very small of replying.

George Brown [Oxford South, President Executive Council] replied to some remarks of the hon. member for Chateauguay (Mr. Holton) on the Reciprocity Treaty[44]. In conclusion, he congratulated him on the very creditable change observable in his tone between the outset of his remarks and the manner in which he had closed the debate, in as much as he had commenced by marking the most ferocious charges, almost amounting to the accusation of obtaining money under false pretences, and, when his charges were refuted, closed by explaining that he not mean this, that or the other thing.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter and cheers.

Matthew Cameron [Ontario North] after some introductory remarks, said he saw nothing whatever in the position of affairs to warrant the calling together of Parliament at this season.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Matthew Cameron [Ontario North]—The ministers had done nothing, and yet they were loud in congratulating themselves upon their cleverness in getting a number of important subjects to precisely the same point at which they were before.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter and ironical cheers.

Matthew Cameron [Ontario North]—Nothing had, in reality been accomplished; and as for ministers themselves, the old leaven of discord, arising from partizan sources, existed as strongly as if they had never coalesced— this being shown by the recent negotiations.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Matthew Cameron [Ontario North]—He regretted perceive that the Government shewed a disposition to avoid enquiry altogether or to give only the most meagre replies. What was the use of calling hon. members together if it was only to treat them in this cool and flippant manner when they asked for information?

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, from the Opposition benches.

Matthew Cameron [Ontario North]—With regard to the money which had been paid over to make good the sum taken from the St. Albans’ banks by the raiders[45], he considered that the course of the Government in relation to it was contrary to the  pretended policy of the Government when they took the vote of the House on the subject, as set forth in the words of the Hon. Attorney-General West [John A. Macdonald] and the Hon. Provincial Secretary [William McDougall]; and he (Mr. Cameron) considered the money in question as having been paid away without the consent or authority of Parliament.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Matthew Cameron [Ontario North]—The hon. gentleman then referred to the statement which had found its way into print, relative to expressions in favor of annexation, or having a tendency in that direction, having been made; and went on to say that the names of parties who used such language should be made public—not that they might be punished, but in order that they might be held up as traitors to the scorn and contempt of all honest men.

Some Hon. Members—Loud cheers.

Matthew Cameron [Ontario North] concluded by expressing his regret that he felt himself bound, in his speech, to animadvert[46] upon the conduct of hon. gentlemen on the Treasury benches, but he felt it, nevertheless, to be his duty to do so.

Richard Cartwright [Lennox & Addington] said that the Government was under a solemn pledge to call Parliament together, and had they not done so, he was sure no hon. gentleman would have been louder in his denunciations of their breach of faith than the hon. member for North Ontario [Matthew Cameron].

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear and laughter.

Richard Cartwright [Lennox & Addington]—He (Mr. Cartwright) believed that as to the mission to England[47], there would of course be difference of opinion; still he thought there was ground for acknowledging that, though it might not have accomplished all that was expected of it, yet that a great deal had been done.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay]—What is it?

Richard Cartwright [Lennox & Addington] said the hon. gentleman should bear in mind that one should never judge of half-done work.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and cheers.

Richard Cartwright [Lennox & Addington]—He maintained that when we were in a position to judge of the full results of the mission to England, all would find that there was reason to admit that a vast deal had been accomplished. The hon. gentleman went to comment upon the very unfavorable opinion of Canada and the Canadians so recently entertained in England, in consequence of the rejection of the Militia Bill of 1862[48], of the adverse opinions expressed in the English newspapers, and of the hostile utterances of members of the Imperial Parliament. It was imperatively necessary we should do something to remove those evil impressions, and set ourselves right with mother-country, and he maintained that a great deal of good in this direction had been accomplished by the recent mission.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Richard Cartwright [Lennox & Addington]—Public opinion had undergone a marked and most agreeable change in reference to Canada—the tone of the press we altered—the courteous attention paid to our representatives were such as had never before been extended to colonists, and were an honor to our country.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Richard Cartwright [Lennox & Addington]—The stock-list, which was by no means a bad barometer of public opinion, showed that renewed confidence had been created in the minds of the English people, and that they were disposed to forget and forgive. In conclusion, the hon. gentleman referred to the alleged unauthorized payments of public money, and stated that he would not pause to discuss them now, in as much as he believed it would conduce much more to promote public business if they were allowed to stand oner until the proper time.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Thomas Parker [Wellington North] believed that we should have had more information on the subject of proposed fortifications, and that the opinion of the House should be had thereupon. It was his opinion that, although the people were undoubtedly in favor of doing all they could in their own defence, and determined to perform their duty in that respect, they were not inclined to enter into a very heavy outlay for extensive fortifications. The hon. gentleman concluded by saying that he approved of the course pursued by the Government in reference to the money taken from the St. Albans’ banks[49].

François Evanturel [Quebec County] said he had listened with attention to the various explanations given, and he was happy to learn that the mission to England had not produced the hasty effect which the Government appeared to desire.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and laughter.

François Evanturel [Quebec County]—He (Mr. Evanturel) was in favor of the principle of Confederation, and had voted for it, after clearly defining his position, but was glad to find that it was not to come into effect prematurely; but that we were to be afforded ample time to mature the scheme and consider it in its various bearings. With regard to the subject of the expenditure for fortifications, he was pleased to observe that the Government had adhered to their pledge, and a reasonable and satisfactory result had been obtained.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

François Evanturel [Quebec County]—He thought it was rather amusing to listen to the Opposition expressing such apparent alarm and disappointment when they found that we were not going to be involved at once in a vast outlay of works of defence, as also their attacks upon the Government because Confederation was not going to be immediately consummated.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and cheers.

François Evanturel [Quebec County]—With regard to the subject of the North-West extension, he (Mr. Evanturel) entertained very decided opinions which we would state at once frankly and openly. Our country was already so vast that the question of its defence was a problem of the utmost importance, and its settlement and development required all our care and all our attention and exertions. Now he did not see why we should increase our difficulties by adding to the Province an immense extent of wild lands, or why we should increase our difficulties by adding to the Province an immense extent of wild lands, or why we should pay a large sum of money for such an undesirable acquisition.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

François Evanturel [Quebec County]—He hardly thought the Government were sincere in making such a proposition, and he sincerely hoped it would not be entertained.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter and cheers.

Joseph Perrault [Richelieu] attacked the policy and conduct of the Government, and denounced in exceedingly strong terms the Confederation scheme. Referring to a remark made by the hon. member for North Ontario (Mr. M. C. Cameron) he combated the idea of denouncing as traitors those who discussed the question of annexation to the United States.

Jean-Baptiste-Éric Dorion [Drummond & Arthabaska]—Hear, hear.

Joseph Perrault [Richelieu]—In the Parliament of Great Britain members had spoken of the advisability of having Canada annexed to the United States, so that the expense of defending it might be avoided; and were members of the House to be told, in the face of a fact like this, that they had no right—charged as they were with the duty of protecting the rights of their constituents and the country at large—to discuss in a frank and open manner, the exigencies of their position.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and oh, oh.

Joseph Perrault [Richelieu]—The hon. gentleman went on the same strain for some time, depicting in doleful language, the grievances the French-Canadians of Lower Canada would inevitably suffer, under the Confederation system, at the hands of the British portion of the population.

Joseph Bellerose [Laval] followed at considerable length, denouncing the annexation arguments of the hon. member for Richelieu (Mr. Perrault), and castigating the Rouges severely for their want of patriotism, their insincerity, their hostility to any measure intended for the defence of the country, and their factious opposition to the policy of the Government.

The motion for going into Committee of Supply was then carried, and the House went into Committee of Supply,—Thomas Street [Welland] in the chair.

George Brown [Oxford South] moved

“That a supply be granted to Her Majesty.”

Carried.

The Committee then rose and reported the resolution—said resolution to be received on Friday.

ENDNOTES

[1]      Source: “Provincial Parliament,” [Quebec] Morning Chronicle (Aug. 16, 1865).

[2]      The Canadian delegation consisted of John A. Macdonald, George-Étienne Cartier, and Alexander Galt. They drafted a report on their discussions with the Imperial Government on Jul. 12, 1865 and it was presented to the Legislative Assembly on Aug. 9, 1865, p. C:15.

[3]      The Morning Chronicle version doesn’t fully explain that Cartier is reading a document here. Both the Montreal Gazette and Le Journal de Quebec publish it as a document. Even in the Chronicle version, after Cartier finishes speaking, Dorion says that Cartier “had read a document to this house.” In the Gazette, their report says, “Attorney General Cartier said he would read an announcement of intention of the Government which would be found to embrace an answer with reference to each of the points named. He proceeded to read the following paper.” The contents of the paper are the same as Cartier’s speech here, so we have left the Chronicle version intact.  

[4]      An Act Respecting the Militia (Province of Canada, 1863). The Act was also amended slightly in 1864 with An Act to amend the Acts “respecting the Militia,” and the “Volunteer Militia Force” (Province of Canada, 1864).

[5]      Canadian-American Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 (Elgin-Marcy Treaty). The United States passed a Joint Resolution abrogating the treaty in Jan. 1865. It was formally terminated on Mar. 17, 1866.

[6]      The Confederate Council of the British North American Colonies was composed of the Governor General and one voting member from each colony (Upper and Lower Canada each getting one vote). The Canadian delegates included Brown, Cartier, Macdonald, and Galt although only one vote per colony was allowed—this ended up being Brown for Upper Canada and Cartier for Lower Canada. The other members were Shea (Newfoundland), Pope (P.E.I.), Ritchie (Nova Scotia), and Wilmot (New Brunswick). They would meet in Quebec a month later, where seven unanimous resolutions were passed by the Council (Sep. 18, 1865).

[7]      Supra footnote 2.

[8]      Supra footnote 3.

[9]      Facing considerable suspicion and fierce hostility to the Quebec Scheme in New Brunswick, Tilley did not submit the scheme to the provincial parliament and a general election on its adoption was inevitable. The legislature was dissolved on February 9^th 1865, and writs were issued for a general election be returned in March 1865. Tilley’s Ministry was soundly defeated, with the Premier himself losing his seat in the legislature, and an anti-confederationist ministry led by Albert Smith was brought into power, taking 35 of 41 seats in the Legislature. Fears of higher tariffs and debt, in addition to lack of clarity on the intercolonial project, and a competing railway project to the United States, raised distrust in the confederation project.

[10]    Supra footnote 2.

[11]    Supra footnote 9. Facing similar discontent, Nova Scotia Premier Charles Tupper delayed introducing the Quebec resolutions to the legislature. Instead, Tupper introduced a resolution in the Assembly, on April 10th, 1865, signaling a return to the safer topic of a Maritime union. While those resolutions spoke of a union of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island, it was believed to be a strategic move merely to bide for more time. Prince Edward Island quickly rejected the Quebec scheme and prorogued the legislature on April 3rd.

[12]    Possibly articles in London’s The Morning Post. Unconfirmed reference.

[13]    Canadian-American Reciprocity Treaty of 1854. Supra footnote 5.

[14]    Supra footnote 2.

[15]    Unconfirmed reference.

[16]    i.e. “with respect to.”

[17]    Supra footnote 2.

[18]    Canadian-American Reciprocity Treaty of 1854. Supra footnote 5.

[19]    Canadian-American Reciprocity Treaty of 1854. Supra footnote 5.

[20]    i.e. “to express anger.”

[21]    William Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act III, Scene II.

[22]    An Act to amend the law respecting the Public Accounts, and the Board of Audit (Province of Canada, 1864).

[23]    Confederate raiders robbed banks in St. Albans, Vermont. They did so from the Province of Canada in the U.S. Civil War.

[24]    Legislative Assembly (Mar. 14, 1865), p. 1032.

[25]    Supra footnote 23.

[26]    Supra footnote 2.

[27]    The “double majority” principle advocated that the Ministry should be supported by two sectional majorities, one for upper and another for lower Canada, in the legislature. J.S. Macdonald believed this principle was not only necessary but already inherent in the sectional nature of the united Canadas. The Macdonald-Sicotte ministry in 1862 in fact practiced the principle. See Bruce W. Hodgins, John Sandfield Macdonald, 1812-1872 (University of Toronto Press, 1971).

[28]    Supra footnote 9.

[29]    Supra footnote 9.

[30]    Supra footnote 11.

[31]    Supra footnote 2.

[32]    Canadian-American Reciprocity Treaty of 1854. Supra footnote 5.

[33]    The Confederate Council of the British North American Colonies was composed of the Governor General and one voting member from each colony (Upper and Lower Canada each getting one vote). Supra footnote 6.

[34]    The commercial convention held in Detroit (Jul. 11-14, 1865) was attended by the Boards of Trades and Chambers of Commerce from across the United States and British North America. It was one of the measures meant to save the Reciprocity Treaty in 1865. The most impactful speech was given by Nova Scotian delegate Joseph Howe on Jul. 14, 1865. For the proceedings of this convention see Proceedings of the Commercial Convention, Held in Detroit, July 11th, 12th, 13th and 14th, 1865 (1865).

[35]    The Potter-Wood controversy stems from a speech that Mr. Potter (an American, and pro-annexionist of British colonies into the American state) gave at the Detroit Convention. In this speech, Mr. Potter read a letter from an anonymous Canadian that sympathized with the annexionist movement and at the request of Canadian delegates on the floor of the convention shouting for the name of this anonymous person, it was revealed to be the influential Mr. O.S. Wood — Superintended of the Montreal Telegraph Company. See “Return To an Address of the Honorable the Legislative Assembly, dated 16^th August, 1865; for copies of Papers relative to Mr. Consul-General Potter’s Speech at Detroit, and Letter of Mr. Wood to Mr. Potter,” [No. 23] in Sessional Papers (1865).

[36]    Supra footnote 35.

[37]    Letter from Luther Holton, repudiating annexationist connections. Unconfirmed reference.

[38]    Supra footnote 35.

[39]    Supra footnote 2.

[40]    Holton appears to be referencing “Canada and Great Britain: Ministerial View of the Future of Canada…” The Globe (Jul. 15, 1865). The article claims it is from “Lord Palmerston’s organ,” from Jun. 29 (unlike Holton’s claim that it was Jun. 14). But it seems to match Holton’s description. The article discusses the mission to England and the importance of the North-West Territory, a cause closely associated with the Reformers and George Brown – hence the insinuation that Brown might have actually written it while in London for his meeting with the Imperial authorities.

[41]    Detroit Convention (Jul. 11-14, 1865). Supra footnote 34.

[42]    Supra footnote 37.

[43]    Supra footnote 35.

[44]    Canadian-American Reciprocity Treaty of 1854. Supra footnote 5.

[45]    Supra footnote 23.

[46]    i.e. “to criticize.”

[47]    Supra footnote 2.

[48]    Bill: An Act Respecting the Militia (Province of Canada, 1862).

[49]    Supra footnote 23.