Document Information

Date: 1864-03-02
By: Province of Canada (Parliament)
Citation: Province of Canada, Parliament, Scrapbook Debates, 8th Parl, 2nd Sess, 1864 at 57-67.
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).

Debate on the Address

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] (who had the floor when the House rose on Tuesday night) said he wished to make some remarks in reply to the Hon. Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat]; but, as that hon. gentleman was not in his place, he (Mr. Galt) would prefer to waive his right in favor of any other hon. member who might desire to address the House.

John Pope [Compton] would like to ask the hon. Premier {John Sandfield Macdonald] a question. Was it the intention of the Government to carry out the principle they announced last session, by remunerating the Volunteers for their drill?

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—I will explain that by-and-bye.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

John Pope [Compton] was understood to remark that the Government had led the volunteers to expect such remuneration for their drill, during the past year. The hon. gentleman said he now desired to offer a few remarks on the subject of the proposed Intercolonial Railway survey. Now he (Mr. Pope) was opposed to this project, but, although hostile to it, he had strongly at heart the honor and credit of Canada; and he felt that the course now being pursued by the Government was not calculated to maintain our national honor and reputation.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

John Pope [Compton]—He repeated that he was opposed to the Intercolonial Railway scheme, but it was duty to protest against the conduct of the Government, as wanting in honesty and frankness. For, if they really intended to build the road, the most essential point was to obtain the co-operation of the Lower Provinces. And since we had no arrangement, no co-operation, no understanding with them—since it was admitted that we could not build it alone, why were we asked to undertake a survey, the cost of which we did not know?

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

John Pope [Compton]—Simply to help the Government out of the scrape into which they had got themselves into through their negotiations

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

John Pope [Compton]—The hon. gentleman concluded after making a few further remarks upon the necessity of co-operation between the Provinces with regard to the survey, if the Government were really sincere in their alleged policy, and upon the damage done to our credit by the past course of the Government on this question.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. Mowat having entered while the hon. member for Compton [John Pope] was speaking —

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] said that, as he observed the hon. Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat] in his place, he would now proceed to make some regards on the defence which he offered yesterday evening, in regard to his own course and that of his colleagues in political matters. At the same time he was sure he expressed his own and the unanimous feeling of the House in observing that the remarks which fell from the hon. member for North Waterloo [Michael Foley] shewed that his course, while in power, and in regard to this Government, had been extremely creditable to him. That he at least had been true to those principles formerly advocated by the present occupants of the Treasury benches, but which they had since woefully deserted.

He (Mr. Galt) was surprised that the first speech made by any member of the Government, in its defence, this session, should have been such as was delivered by the hon. Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat]; if it was all that could be uttered in defence by the hon. gentlemen opposite, of those who had agitated the country from one end to the other for years, about Representation by Population, and afterwards abandoned it — if all had been said for the Government that could be said, he thought the country would be very much dissatisfied.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—It would feel that an agitation fraught with the good deal of danger to the country had been promoted for years by those hon. gentlemen while in Opposition, and that when the time and opportunity had arrived for giving effect to their views on this question of popular representation, that they had put those views to the one side; that the administration had systematically deceived the country in regard to their sincerity. We were now told that the claims of those hon. gentlemen to the confidence of this House and country no longer rested on their advocacy of the great principles formerly paraded by them as alone calculated to advance the prosperity of the country, but solely on their personal merits. The hon. Postmaster-General [Oliver Mowat], forgetful of the small majority of two or three possessed by the Government last session ignored this slender following, and the means by which it was obtained, and, forsooth, challenged the Opposition to try its strength with this formidable Government. Now, he dare say, the latter would be only too glad the Opposition should do so, and be too glad to be relieved by an adverse vote, of the responsibility of coming before the country, and showing by their conduct before the country, and showing by their conduct the insincerity of their intentions in regard to the reply to the Speech now under considerations — too glad to be relieved of the task of carrying out the important measures promised in the Speech — too glad to be relieved of the duty of imposing additional taxation, and of announcing by their measures to increase the revenue, that the great retrenchment which had been effected was a sham, and that they had been unsuccessful in equalizing the revenue and expenditure.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—But the Opposition had thought that they should fulfil their duty to the country better, by allowing the hon. gentlemen in power the opportunity of showing whether they were sincere or not, but putting them to the test, as to their sentiments, when called upon to give effect to their sentiments, when called upon to give effect to their principles. But the Government which had hitherto enjoyed this opportunity, had failed.

Now, we should find out, after the passing of this Address, whether the hon. gentlemen were prepared to submit measures carrying out the policy, had made no defence and submitted no explanations in regard thereto, till last night. What was then said by one of the Administration had been drawn out of them. Who could have supposed that the reference in the Speech to the Intercolonial Railway, meant that all the negotiations with the Lower Provinces had been broken off, and that Canada was about to proceed with the survey alone, and at her own expense, without knowing whether the Government of the Lower Provinces gave their consent or not? Who could have supposed that the paragraph in regard to the Improvement of our island water communication, and the opening up of the great Ottawa Ship Canal, only referred to a small local improvement at the Greenville, whose estimated cost was $10,000?

Some Hon. Members—Cheers and laughter.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—This was, then, the scheme intended to develop the resources of the great Ottawa Valley, and attract hither the trade of the West. He confessed these were matters which it would have been much better for the Government to have stated before than to have stated after their being reluctantly drawn from them at the end of a week’s discussion.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—He would refer to the defence of the Hon. Postmaster-General [Oliver Mowat] on the subject of representation by population. He had told the House he regretted the non-adoption of the principle by the whole of the Cabinet. That sort of regret evidently satisfied itself, on his part, with the maintenance of his positions in the House and Cabinet, without making say effort to obtain such a salutary object. He put his regret quietly in his pocket with other little casual advantages which accrued from his position as Postmaster-General [Oliver Mowat]. He made no effort to obtain this desirable object; but practically said to Upper Canada, “You see how much you have gained by my going into office. Why, the Macdonald-Sicotte Government supported the double-majority. We have killed off that. Besides, representation by population was a close question with them; it is an open one with us.” It was so open that the Hon. Postmaster-General [Oliver Mowat] was a party to offering a place in the Cabinet to the hon. member for Russell [Robert Bell], an opponent of the principle; so open that the hon. gentlemen would agree to remain in a Government, every one of the Upper Canada members of which was opposed to it on principle.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—That was a point on which the hon. member for North Waterloo [Michael Foley] had dwelt with great power. He (Mr. Galt) was surprised to see the views, which the Hon. Postmaster-General [Oliver Mowat] and several of his colleagues had formerly warmly advocated, reduced now to such modest dimensions. He thought the House could not doubt that the hon. gentleman’s self-sacrifice would go the length of inducing him to remain in the Government, and assume to himself the whole advocacy of the rights of Upper Canada, with his colleagues.

He (Mr. Galt) believed that the Hon. Postmaster-General [Oliver Mowat] commenced his political career under the auspices of the hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown], and that lie had stated he did not take any interest in politics until he placed himself under the wing of the hon. gentleman. Why, in fact, he was a Pharisee of the Pharisees, brought up at the feet of the Gamaliel of Grittiam, the hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown]; and, instead of carrying out his doctrines, he saw him enter the Government, and actually prevent their adoption.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—The house would understand the feelings with which the latter must view the conduct of the hon. Postmaster-General [Oliver Mowat].

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga, Attorney-General East]—Would you like to see those measures carried out, whose abandonment you comment upon?

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] said he would like, and this House and country would like, the character of our public men to be beyond suspicion.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Michael Foley [Waterloo North]—The Hon. Attorney-General East [Antoine-Aimé Dorion] must himself have assented to representation by Population on going into a Government favorable thereto.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers and laughter.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] said he thought that those who sent the hon. Postmaster-General [Oliver Mowat] here,—who had put him in a position of power and emolument, and given him influence in the counsels of the country—expected and desired he should carry out those principles of which they approved, and to which he had himself always professed attachment.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—The question was not whether he (Mr. Galt) would like such and such things, but whether hon. members were expected to support the views they professed in this House, for which they had been sent to Parliament. He was sure that the hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown] must regard it as a great hardship to see that the great party which he had built up by his energy and talent, should submit to the Government’s occupying in regard to the representation question precisely the same position as the Cartier-Macdonald Government had maintained. The latter had been denounced year after year, and session after session, for leaving this an open question, by the very party who now acted in the same manner. The members of this Government and their supporters had been hunted and hounded from one end of the country to the other, for their course in this matter—their conduct being held up to reprobation by the very men who now imitated it themselves, and in so doing claimed the confidence of the people of Upper Canada. We saw them, in contradiction of their repeated resolutions on the journals of this House, in regard

• (p. 58)

to representation by population, now giving the lie to their former declarations, and ruling the country on principles contrary to those which they affirmed over and over again as necessary for its peace and good Government.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—This was a melancholy spectacle. The defence offered by the hon. Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat] was not what the House had a right to expect. If he had really any grounds for the change in his opinions he ought to have candidly and frankly declared he no longer believed in the efficacy of the remedy previously advocated. It was not enough for the hon. Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat] to sit on the Treasury benches and say—so long as we are in office there is no need of the measure we once advocated. While we are none there will be sufficient protection for the rights of Upper Canada. Did we not know the course which the hon. gentleman would take if out of office to-morrow? He would like a former prodigal son, when he came to feed on the husks of Opposition, turn his former leader, his political father, and fly back to the parental household. He would then find it was necessary to be himself once more, under the wing of the hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown].

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—once more to offer up his fervid aspirations for the good and the rights of Upper Canada which once we heard, but now heard no more.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers and laughter.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—He (Mr. Galt) must participate with the hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown] in the regret he must feel that his chosen one, his first-born, had wandered from the paternal halls, at his spending his political substance on the riotous benches of the Treasury; and that he had only found hope that when the cold breath of Opposition came upon the prodigal, he would remember the parental instructions.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—He (Mr. G.) trusted this hope would be realized before this session closed, and that the hon. gentleman should be restored to Upper Canada and be found advocating those principles once more, and, probably, the more strongly because he had abandoned them for a time.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers and laughter.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—The hon. Postmaster-General [Oliver Mowat] not content with defending the Government’s abandonment of Representation by Population, or making it an open question, frankly and candidly acquiesced in the claim made by the hon. member for North Waterloo [Michael Foley], that all the retrenchment made in the Postmaster General’s department, of which the present Government had boasted, was carried out by the former before he had taken office. The hon. Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat] was willing to allow his predecessor that small shred of comfort, and willing that it should be understood that he had discharged the duties of his office well; and he had observed, in addition that the few clerks discharged from this department in his predecessor’s time, could not be discharged over again—that the retrenchment then effected could not be repeated.

He (Mr. Galt) was glad and sorry to have heard such a statement—glad to have heard that all the retrenchment hon. gentlemen opposite had ever dreamt of was the dismissal of a few clerks, and sorry that the country should have been so deluded by the hon. gentlemen who, while in office, manifested such ignorance of the art of Government as to represent that a vast amount could be saved by such means.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—The country was not disabused of the erroneous idea once promulgated—by the announcement that the retrenchment effected consisted in the dismissal of three or four clerks, and that this operation could not be repeated. And even this had been done before the present hon. Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat] came into office. Well, what had he done since his appointment. Nothing at all. We were told the claims of the present Government to support consisted in its wonderful administrative abilities, departmental energy, etc. He would like to know what energy, departmental or otherwise, the Hon. Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat] had displayed since his appointment? The energy and ability displayed by the hon. gentleman who preceded him in the office—a belief acquiesced in by the hon. Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald], judging from his silence, we were at a loss to know why the hon. member for North Waterloo [Michael Foley] had shown himself a most excellent departmental officer, who had effected all the retrenchment made in the office; and as all this had been established by the present incumbent, why had he been dismissed to make way for the latter? It was very remarkable that the Hon. Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat] should be in such a position. It might have been supposed that he, who had made so many sacrifices in accepting office, had done so with some great scheme in view, something to make a name for himself. And what was the result? Why, it appeared his departmental ability amounted to nothing, and his defence was that he had done nothing at all, his predecessor having accomplished everything that was possible.

With regard to the steamship contract, it was found that the hon. gentleman had only carried out—and, perhaps, not quite as well as might have been done—what was proposed by not only his predecessor, but by the Government which preceded him. The hon. Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat] had, evidently, felt that a strong point had been made against him and the present Government by the hon. member for North Waterloo [Michael Foley], in regard to the North-West territory. The former argued that the only course which the Government ought to have taken in this matter had been followed; that the Government was not to be bound to take possession of this territory or open a diplomatic correspondence with the Imperial Government in regard to the appointment of a surveyor to ascertain and define the western boundary of Canada. The hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown] must feel gratified at such sentiments, and also that the claims of Canada to this territory were in a favorable position. He had contended again and again that this valuable region ought to be acquired by us and thrown open to the youth of the country for settlement.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—That hon. gentleman had argued in favor of our taking possession of the Hudson’s Bay territory altogether, and uniting it to this country. Well, he (Mr. G.) would like to ask the hon. Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat] whether, at the time of the recent transference of the old Company’s charter to the new Hudson’s Bay Company, he had felt it his duty to communicate diplomatically with the Imperial Government in reference to the rights and interests of Canada in this affair.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga, Attorney-General East]—How does that affect the Government?

Luther Holton [Chateauguay, Minister of Finance]—How does it affect us?

Some Hon. Members—Ministerial laughter.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] replied the Government had seen the rights of the old Company transferred to the new Company, possessing an entirely different policy, and had, at the same time, not felt that the rights and claims of Canada, which the members and friends of the present administration had declared over and over again, were so pressing, did not justify them in sending a single despatch to the Colonial Office on this point. Was it possible that the watchful guardians of the rights of Canada had slept at their post—that they had not been aware of the transfer till it was completed—that they had awoke up one fine morning and found the whole interests and territory of the old Hudson’s Bay Company handed over to the new one without anything having been done in behalf of Canada. It did not say much for the diligence and legislative ability of this Government if they knew nothing and cared less about this important transaction.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—The sooner we got an administration which would be more watchful in matters of this sort the better.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—The explanations of hon. Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat] in respect to the Ottawa buildings were extremely singular and amusing, considering that it was only three or four months since he tendered his resignation in a very indignant terms, because the Government announced its determination to remove the Seat of Government to Ottawa. Now he was most anxious to go to Ottawa. New light was beginning to dawn upon him.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter and cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—He was beginning to see that the course he took on this and other matters was a wrong one, and probably we should not be too hard upon the repentant sinner, but allow him to express the fullest joy at the completion of these buildings, which he had done his best to prevent. We ought to be glad to know that the hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown] was also going to rejoice at the speedy removal of the Government to Ottawa.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—Really, if we could not congratulate the country upon any great practical advantage derived from the presence of those gentlemen on the Treasury benches, we might do so upon the degree of moderation being evinced by those hitherto characterised as the firebrands of political society. When we found the hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown] willing to rejoice at going to Ottawa, and, if necessary, remain in Quebec another session—when he supported a Government which had ignored representation by population, and had treated North-west extension as a sham—when we found him and other hon. gentlemen on that side who had taken such strong ground on those questions, so exceedingly mild now, we might have hopes that the country would not be plunged into rebellion for some time.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—He remembered the hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown] declaring that the Upper Province was in such a threatening state as left it perfectly impossible to predict what would happen

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

George Brown [Oxford South]—Not me.

Some Hon. Members—Loud Laughter.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] was quite sure he was the party. Only last night the hon. gentlemen cheered some words that fell from the hon. member for North Waterloo [Michael Foley], when he reminded the hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown] that he warned the Ministry last session that they could not much longer continue in their then unsatisfactory position, being in a minority in Lower Canada—that some change should be made, and so forth.

George Brown [Oxford South] said he did not cheer that part of the speech.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] accepted the denial.

George Brown [Oxford South] thought the hon. member for North Waterloo [Michael Foley] said, referring to his (Mr. Brown’s speech, of last session, that the position in which parties now stood in this country was exceedingly unsatisfactory, and that it was desirable a change should be made. He (Mr. B.) entirely assented to that position.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] said the hon. gentleman stated the position of affairs was unsatisfactory. Well, the Government must be to blame for this condition. The positions of affairs, as far as the Opposition was concerned, could not be unsatisfactory.

George Brown [Oxford South]—Exceedingly unsatisfactory

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] went on to say that it must be extremely unpleasant and annoying to the hon. gentleman, who had been so long in Opposition, to find that now, when his friends were in power, they could not carry out his views. It must be painful to a gentleman of such energy, zeal and ability, after having for years made great exertions to build up a great party, to find them, on succeeding to power, abandoning his favorite principles. It must be a bitter pill for him to swallow—this discovery that not one of the doctrines be advocated, not one of the material objects, so long desired by him, was to be found in the policy of the present Government.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—His support of it was a question for his own conscience, but he must remember that this attempt to delude the public generally, and persuade them they were getting a fish when merely receiving a serpent at the hands of this administration, must inevitably prove a failure. No one knew better that the course he and his friends were taking, in regard to this Cabinet, must frustrate his own views.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—The hon. Postmaster-General [Oliver Mowat], in his defence last night, admitted he could not now give effect to the principles he maintained while in Opposition; that he had not, consequently, performed his duty as a public officer than himself. He admitted this, and thought proper to remain it a Government which had been maintaining itself in power by systematic attempts to damage the reputation of its previous supporters. And yet be arrogated to himself the name of a Christian politician. When he thought of the appellation, a different name suggested itself to his lips. When he recollected that a high-spirited honorable gentleman, who was deemed worthy of the name of father of his country—one who never wavered in his political opinions—never intrigued against his friends or colleagues—always maintaining the rights of the people of Upper Canada, and promoting their interests by every personal sacrifice—when he remembered the party to whom this applied was the late Robert Baldwin—a real “Christian Politician”, the least we heard of the Postmaster General’s [Oliver Mowat] claim to this title the better.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—The Speech from the Throne had suggested great variety of most important public works, which would necessarily involve a large expenditure of public money. It contained suggestions of many matters which should form the subject of legislation. The Speech must either be regarded as made in all sincerity, or in a delusive spirit, intended to deceive the people of the country. If insincere, it would reflect the greatest possible disgrace on the Government which composed it. We had some reason to doubt its sincerity, because this was the third Speech from the Throne, not one of the promises contained in which had been fulfilled, except in the single insurance of the Militia. We might well be permitted to doubt whether the course of the Government on this point had been such as to entitle them to be trusted in future legislation. The House could, however, speedily have an opportunity of judging as to their sincerity in regard to the present speech. He would proceed to consider

• (p. 59)

some of the points in the Speech—on the supposition that the Government were sincere in the matter. He would asked the House to refer to the statement in the Speech with respect to the revenue being, as regards the expenditure, in a state of chronic deficiency and that the Government would be compelled to resort to additional taxation, to make ends meet. If that were true, Government would not be justified in bringing forward large schemes involving a heavy outlay. He would say that the principle which had been urged by the hon. gentlemen on the Ministerial side, when in opposition—that as long as there was a deficiency of revenue, the Province ought not to embark on any new works—was the correct one. The hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown] had always argued that the expenditure of the public money ought to follow, not precede the adjustment of the revenue.

Now, however, the House was called upon to proceed with the execution of works involving an expenditure of several millions of dollars, when there was a large deficiency in the revenue—and this too, by a Government which came into office on the understanding that they should make both ends meet. They had entered and held to office on the understanding that they should not do as their predecessors, but equalize the revenue and expenditure. What was the fact? The first act passed by the Government imposed taxes which would produce about a million dollars, and we should soon see them coming down with another measure to raise quite as much additional taxes. And if the Province embarked upon such works as proposed, we should not merely have to make provision for the accruing deficiency, but the for future expenditures. It was difficult for him to understand how a man possessing the practical ability and financial knowledge of the hon. Finance Minister, could ask this House to vote millions of dollars for improvements, when he knew of the failure of his measures to adjust the revenue and expenditure.

Although not opposed to many of the improvements proposed, he (Mr. Galt) objected to the time and the mode of their execution. It required some explanation from hon. gentlemen opposite to enable members to understand why they should take this particular time to indicate those great improvements, especially when they were obligated to ask the House for additional means to meet the deficiency. The only conclusion he could come to was that these works were offered as a gigantic bride to the country.

The Government had sought, by approaching individual members and interests to support themselves in this House, and had invariably failed except in one or two lamentable instances, to obtain any aid. And now, having failed to demoralize the Opposition, they had attempted to demoralize the whole country by offering a bribe in the shape of the expenditure at different places, or large sums of money. This was the real explanation of the Speech. It was confession they had failed to obtain the confidence either of the House or country in the policy first set forth. Having abandoned their policy of retrenchment, and making the two ends meet, the House heard a lavish expenditure now proposed, of the necessity of spending vast sums to attract western trade; and that the construction of the Ottawa Ship Canal and Intercolonial Railway must now be proceeded with, and that no longer was it necessary for the country to husband its resources. This speech showed that if the Government failed to give the country good legislation, they were ready to bribe the country into a support of their policy. This explained the policy indicated in the Speech, and he believed it was one which ought to be denounced by this House, and which would surely meet with the condemnation of the country. The Province was now laboring under financial and other difficulties, and had suffered and was still suffering from the debt already incurred in the erection of large public works; and he was surprised that the Hon. Finance Minister [Luther Holton], knowing these things, should have favored the introduction of such schemes at this particular time, which, if entered upon, would have the effect of introducing again a similar state of things to that in the time of Mr. Hincks. Could the hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown] justify this policy, which involved the expenditure to the Government of millions of public money, and the leaving to their successors the odium of imposing taxation to meet the liability? At this moment when it was proposed to advise His Excellency [Viscount Monck] to proceed with these works; the Hon. Finance Minister [Luther Holton] knew perfectly well that our securities were at 10 per cent, discount. How could it be otherwise? He knew, also, that these undertakings would not improve our credit.

He (Mr. Galt) believed that, in the minds of the Ministry, the political had overborne the financial situation, and that the Hon. Finance Minister’s [Luther Holton] colleagues had prevailed upon him to call the millions of money for purposes indicated, and which, for years, the country would suffer from. Was this the price which the country was to pay for the maintenance in office of those hon. gentlemen? What had the country gained by their retention of power? It was clear they had not equalized the revenue and expenditure, for they were going to call upon us for more taxes. It was clear that the legislative demands of the country, especially of Upper Canada, had not been granted. The House had been told the financial improvements effected ought to be received as a solace for all other deficiencies on the part of the Government. He would ask whether the hon. Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald] had, during the last three years, distinguished himself by administrative ability in regard to the measures for the defence of the country? They took office when the whole country was ready to respond to the call of the public defence—when men from one end of the Province to the other were coming forward and asking only a moderate amount of encouragement and support in their laudable and patriotic efforts. What did we now find? Why, that after their being two years in office, the volunteers force was thoroughly discontented and ready to disband. This was the result of the rule of the present Government, the country being now less prepared to defend itself than when the hon. gentlemen came into power.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—The next question he would briefly refer to was the very important one of the settlement of the country.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—Had the administration of the department under the control of the hon. Commissioner of Crown Lands [William McDougall] been beneficial to the Province? Had anything in fact been done? No doubt the hon. Commissioner would fall back upon the favorite plea of retrenchment. But hon. gentlemen should bear in mind that the there were two kinds of retrenchment—that which was judicious and beneficial, and that which was only calculated to dry up the life springs of the body politics.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—The hon. Commissioner [William McDougall] was not in favor of colonization roads, he was not in favor of surveys, and his ideas of the capabilities of the country for settlement were so limited, that he proclaimed loudly that there was no more land fit for settlement in the Province.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—He (Mr. Galt) did not propose to occupy the time of the House much longer; but he would take occasion to remark that there were two kinds of administrative ability. One sort of administrative ability was that which qualified men to discharge the routine duties of their office in a regular and attentive manner. He would not pretend to deny that honourable gentlemen on the Treasury Benches might perhaps possess this species of administrative ability; but here was a much higher and more important kind—that which devoted itself to the maintenance of our national credit and reputation, and the advancement of our material interests. We had a right to demand that our credit should be jealously guarded from imputation. Did hon. gentlemen opposite endeavor, by their conduct, to preserve unsullied and intact our reputation abroad? Did they endeavor to maintain a good understanding with the mother-country, or friendly relations with the sister-Provinces?

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—The best answer to this query was found in the results of their negotiations, and in the unfortunate condition of our relations with New Brunswick.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—If the acts of the Government were to be taken as the proofs of their administrative ability, then the sooner we were rid of them the better for this country.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—This House had now met for the second time under the auspices of the present Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald] and his colleagues. We all recollected the first session, and the manner in which the Government had failed to carry out their promise, made at the commencement of that session. They had failed to bring down their measures. We were to have had financial remedies; but they came not, and the country at the end of that session, had to content itself with the amended Militia and Volunteer acts. This neglect to take up the questions of interest and necessity to the public was hardly a cause for astonishment when we recollected the positions in which hon. gentlemen on the Ministerial Benches stood with regard to those doctrines which once constituted their political creed.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—The position occupied by their supporters was equally incongruous. He (Mr. Galt) would like, for instance to ask the hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown] if he was not aware of the fact that Representation by Population would be agitated anew if the present Government went out of power? Would not the hon. gentleman agitate it himself? No doubt it would be better that it should be agitated than that it should remain in abeyance.

An Hon. Member—Why don’t you advocate it?

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—For a very good [?reason?]. [?But?] he (Mr. Galt) would say that the question was fraught with danger as long as the people found that their leaders, who had once advocated it were willing to give it up for the blandishments of office. Better far, as he had already said, that it should be fully discussed on the floor of the House. Than that it should be kept in abeyance.—The hon. gentleman then concluded his eloquent speech by expressing a hope that the time was close at hand when the Government would have an opportunity of showing whether they were honest in their numerous promises and then sat down amid loud cheers.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands] was glad to hear that hon. gentlemen would allow the address to pass without any further discussion or formal amendment. He could not flatter himself that anything he might say would make much impression, but he thought it was in the interests of the public that the speech which had just been made by the Hon. Mr. Galt should receive a few observations in reply.

He (the speaker) must congratulate his hon. friend on the tone in which he addressed the House, which was in agreeable construct with the speeches of other gentleman on the same side.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—At the same time he must express his regret that the hon. gentlemen, who had held a high official position for a number of years, and who had had the control of great and important interests, whose name in fact was written in the history of the country, should have thought it necessary, for purposes of his own or of his party, to make assertions, which were reckless and not well founded.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—The way in which the Honorable Mr. Galt had put words into the mouth of the Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat] was something exceedingly strange and unaccountable. He charged the Postmaster [Oliver Mowat] with saying what he did not say; he charged the Postmaster with having admitted last night that he had not performed his official duty. The Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat] had said nothing of the kind.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—He said he claimed the credit for himself.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—That is a very different statement from the one made by the hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt].

Some Hon. Members—Hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—If the Postmaster General [Oliver Mowat] was prepared to admit that he had not performed his duty, the sooner he left office and retired into private life the better for himself and the country. With regard to the charges made by the honorable member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] against the Government, or particular members of it, as to their faithlessness or abandonment of principles which they supported when in Opposition, he (Hon. Mr. Macdougall) would say that these were fair subjects of attack. The parliamentary history of England showed that attacks of this kind were perfectly fair—and he took it that this was a peculiar feature of our parliamentary system. But he thought it was somewhat amusing to hear the hon. gentlemen inveigh against the Government, because in the interests of the country they had not carried out certain measures. The hon. gentleman almost shed tears over the deplorable condition of the people in consequence of the abandonment of Representation by Population.

He (the speaker) could understand how his hon. friend; the member for South Oxford [George Brown], who had always been an energetic advocate of this measure would feel regret on the subject. He could understand also, how some hon. gentlemen on the Ministerial side of the House would feel on that subject; but he did not understand how the Hon. Mr. Galt, who, when in the Government, opposed the principle of Representation by Population with all his might, and all his energy, could refer to this topic.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—He, a Lower Canadian politician, speak of this question—he, who used to term the Opposition, when advocating it, destructives and revolutionist.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—He could not understand why the Honorable Mr. Galt, whose political antecedents were well known on this subject, could make such a lachrymose appeal. Did the hon. gentlemen fancy that the House or the people outside would believe in his sincerity? Did he fancy the House or country would believe that if the hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] were on the Treasury benches, the question of Representation by Population would be advanced. The hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] did not believe that change of Government would advance that question. Well, then, if that were his position he (the speaker) thought that the less that hon. gentlemen said on that point, the fewer appeals he made on the subject, the fewer lamentations for the position for all parties.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—It was unnecessary for him in reference to his own personal views or that of the Government, to re-state their position on that question in consequence of their accession to office. That position was well known

• (p. 60)

to the country. If it were impossible for a Government to be formed which would address itself to the solution of the difficult problem of constitutional amendments—if that problem be difficult or impossible—it was in consequence of the action, of the gentlemen opposite.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—He repeated it was in consequence of the course they pursued when in office, it was in consequence of the state of feeling which they had engendered in Lower Canada, in fact it was in consequence of their persistent opposition, that this question was rendered difficult.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—It was because the gentlemen opposite had charged the advocates of Representation by Population with revolutionary tendencies, because they appealed to the national and religious prejudices of Lower Canada, because they stated that if that measure were passed the country would cease to be secure or prosperous. It was in consequence of these facts that it became impossible for this parliament, in the present state of parties, to amend the constitution in this way.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East]—Why not?

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—A vote had already been taken on the question. The hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] had expressed his sorrow that the country had been deluded on the subject of Retrenchment except in the dismissal of three or four clerks. Well, the hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] would find, when the Public Accounts were submitted, that there had been a very considerable Retrenchment not only in the matters of clerks, but in all the departments, as well as in the general expenditure of the country.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—The difference, in this respect, between the past and the present Governments would be made obvious to the country.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—The hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] had been in power for a number of years, and had a powerful majority at his back; yet, it was found, when he was on the eve of leaving office, that he came to the House and stated that there was a deficiency of five million of dollars.

Some Hon. Members—Applause.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—His speech in regard to this matter was circulated in pamphlet from over the country. He admitted this deficit much to the surprise of some of his supporters, and perhaps to their disgust. This was the conclusion of all the fine promises of the Hon. Mr. Galt—this was the result of his great financiering ability.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—Yes, the hon. member had to come down and admit that to get through the operations of the year, it would be necessary to lay on burdens to increase the revenue or borrow to the extent of $5,000,000. Now, what had the present Government accomplished? They had carried on the affairs of the country in a tolerably satisfactory manner; they had administered the different departments satisfactorily; they had paid the public officers, and the public debts as it became due; they had discharged all liabilities.

Some Hon. Members—Applause.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—The Government had done all this without going to England to borrow money. The hon. member for Sherbrooke would have had to go to England under disadvantageous circumstances; and he would have found it very difficult to borrow there. The Government had been able to do all these things, and yet they had not imposed taxation to any large extent, or borrowed to any large extent.

Some Hon. Members—Applause.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] desired to know if the Government had discharged all their current obligations.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands] replied that he was speaking in a general manner, and he did not propose submitting figures to the House. He was stating general results, and the general result of their efforts was that the affairs of the country had been carried on in a most satisfactory manner financially. –

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—If they had not discharged all their liabilities, the had at least provided for them. There was no creditors knocking at their doors and being told that there was no funds with which to settle their demands. They were prepared to properly account for all the funds coming into their bands. The vital point was that before the hon. gentleman left office he admitted that he required five millions of dollars to meet the deficiency of the year, while the present Government required no such sum, had not borrowed from abroad, had kept the expenditure within the estimate, and had brought the revenue and expenditure of the country to an equality within about a million of dollars.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—The hon. Gentleman must not state that I left a deficiency of five millions, for it is not so. He might as well state that the present Hon. Finance Minister [Luther Holton] acknowledged a deficiency of four millions. A large portion of the amount was for the redemption of debt.

George Brown [Oxford South]—Why, there was only a little over $300,000 required for that purpose.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—Yes, that is all out of a sum of $5,133,000.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] said that there was the item of $700,000 for the Ottawa Buildings, and $800,000 for the Seignorial Tenure. The real deficit was only $2,772,000.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands] said he would quote the hon. Gentleman’s very words, from a report of his speech, revised by himself, which were: “The liabilities of the year I have stated at $12,527,058, and the revenue at $7,375,050. Consequently the amount of money to be provided was no less than $5,132,000.

Some Hon. Members—Loud Cheers.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] said that the position of the Hon. Mr. Holton was precisely the same in character, as he had to provide four millions for redemption of debentures falling due in England; but nobody pretended to say that there was a deficiency on the year of that amount. He (Hon. Mr. Galt) had never made any such statement as that the deficiency was five millions.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—Surely the hon. gentleman did not mean to deny the correctness of his own statement. After making the statement he had just ready, the hon. gentleman went into the details, and in the appendix was a statement of the various objects for which the money was appropriated, and among others there was the sum of only $399,000 for the redemption of the public debt.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—What do you call the Seignorial Tenure. Was not that a redemption of debt?

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands] replied that it was not. It was a part of his Government’s extraordinary expenditure. The Government now found themselves in the position that the revenue was fast approaching the amount of the annual expenditure—a fact which formed the best possible answer to the hon. gentleman’s statement, that the retrenchment effected had been confined to the dismissal of a few clerks.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—The difference between the two Governments was, that whereas that of the hon. gentleman was extravagant in its expenditure, leading to the necessity of increased taxation and borrowing of money, and whereas there was a deficiency of between two and three millions of dollars per annum, and whereas the getting in debt and borrowing had been lauded as the policy of his Government—and of which policy he evidently himself had always a high appreciation—a very different policy had been adopted and a very different result reached by the present Administration.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—It had been charged that there was no statesmanship connected with the present Government, and that the affairs of the country could not safely be trusted in their hands. Well, the answer to all that kind of things was that the state of the finances, under the administration of this mere routine Government, had made an immense improvement, having taken a long step towards a perfectly sound and healthy condition.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—The hon. gentleman also found fault with the policy of the Government, in relation to the North West territory. And here, he (Hon. Mr. Macdougall) had to repeat the complaint that the hon. gentleman would persist in trying to put the Government in a position which they did not occupy. He said that the Government had indicated by the Speech that all they could do in reference to the North West territory was to arrange with the Imperial Government to send out a surveyor to settle the boundary line of Canada on the West. If he would take the trouble to read the Speech again, he would see that something more than that was intended. This question was a large one and one which the hon. gentleman and his colleagues undertook to deal with by sending home a distinguished legal gentleman to watch over the interests of Canada, but it was found that up to the present day very little interests of Canada, but it was found that up to the present day very little progress had been made in reference to it. The Government had come to the conclusion that the best land in what was commonly called Canada West having been to a large degree already occupied; and in a view of the fact that discoveries of the precious metal shad been made in the vast territory, and that emigrants in considerable numbers had already passed through it to British Columbia; and in view of the fact that persons of capital and enterprise had proposed to open up excellent communication with it and through it; and in view of the very important change that had been effected in the composition of the Hudson’s Bay Company—the rights formerly held by an exclusive corporation interested only in the fur trade having passed into new hands—a fact which had been announced by documents from the Colonial Office; in view of all these facts and circumstances, the Government felt that it was desirable to take some action on the subject of opening up the territory of Canada westward. The question then arose as to the proper steps to be taken first. They soon came to the conclusion that the first thing to be done was to determine whether the Red River territory belonged to Canada, or to some other country, and the consequence was that a correspondence had been opened with the Imperial Government on the subject, as stated in the Speech. He did not know that there was any harm in his stating his individual view of the case, at the present time, which was that Canada was entitled to claim as a portion of its siol, all that part of the North-West territory that could be proved to have been in the possession of the French at the time of the cession of Canada to the British. If that should turn out to be the proper view, a very large portion of valuable land would come within the bounds of Canada that had not heretofore been generally considered to belong to it. The Government would, no doubt, see that all proper means were used to secure a proper recognition of the rights of Canada, and when these were secured, proper measures would be submitted to the Legislature for the opening up of the territory referred to.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—It was a question of no small importance, and involving many disputed points. Then the hon. gentleman had taken exception to the paragraph about the improvements upon the St. Lawrence and Ottawa, which were designed to promote the trade and commerce of the country. The hon. gentleman deplored the condition in which the country stood, in reference to its ability to proceed with extensive improvements, but by whom was the country brought into such a condition?

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—How did it come to pass that they found themselves not in a position which rendered it inexpedient to undertake those great works? It would have been most satisfactory to the House if the hon. gentleman had proceeded to show that he and his friends were not chiefly and primarily responsible for that state of things.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—Notwithstanding the improvement that had taken place in the finances under the management of the present Government, it might be argued that the Government had taken too much upon themselves, to proceed this year, with those public improvements, but his view of the matter was that the country could not afford to stand still, and that the importance of having further improvements made in the St. Lawrence and Welland canals would warrant their drawing upon the future, to a limited extent, for the necessary funds, and giving the next generation an opportunity of contributing towards improvements which would be for their benefit as well as our own. He believed that the country would sustain them in making those improvements, when they knew that the public resources were being properly husbanded.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—The hon. gentleman had endeavored to make it appear that retrenchment was not necessary, and that those works ought to be gone about on a large scale. But his opinion was that it was the duty of the Government to continue to husband the resources of the country, in order that they might be able to borrow the money necessary to carry on those useful and profitable undertakings, at the lowest possible rate. The hon. gentleman and his friends had spent the public money recklessly on useless schemes for the benefit of friends and private interests, on roads and railways in this and that direction, and through territory where they were not required, and could find nothing to do.

Some Hon. Members—Applause.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—When the Government came to submit the details to the House, they would be able to show that the public improvements foreshadowed in the Speech from the Throne, were quite necessary to be made, and would pay, either directly or indirectly, within a few years for the annual outlay which their construction imposed upon the people.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—Then, upon the Militia question, the Government were charged with not having done their duty. The Volunteers were in a state of disorganization, and ruin generally stared them full in the face!

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—That was the charge; but he was at a loss to understand where the hon. gentleman got the facts necessary to support such a charge. It was very easy for a gentleman of his volubility to stand up and pour forth by the hour a stream of charges and denunciations of the Government, but it would be some satisfaction to those who were compelled to listen to him if he could produce some facts with which to substantiate his statements.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—When the Minister of Militia came to submit the real facts of the case, obtained from official and reliable sources, to the House, it would be found that very satisfactory progress had been made in Militia matters. How did he matter stand? The Cartier-Macdonald Government had presented a bill to the House that was so distasteful to it, that a large number of their supporters risked their political position for the purpose of defeating so extravagant a measure,

• (p. 61)

and one so poorly adapted to the requirements of the country. When the Macdonald-Sicotte Government came into power, they introduced a moderate and somewhat experimental measure on the subject, which was passed; and then at least session, more elaborated and efficient measures were submitted and received the cordial support of many honorable gentlemen on the other side of the House. If those measures had failed to meet the wants and expectations of the country, it was to be hoped that those honorable gentlemen were not indisposed to take their share of the responsibility of passing them.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—Ministers were fallable men, and if they did not introduce a measure in as perfect a form as it ought to be, it was the business and the duty of the Legislature to suggest amendments and correct errors. Perhaps some amendments to the Bill of last session would be submitted for consideration by the Minister of Militia [John Sandfield Macdonald]. He thought they might all congratulate themselves, however, upon the happy and prosperous position they occupied. While Europe was distributed by wars, and while a gigantic civil war was raging in a neighboring country, Canada was allowed quietly to pursue the arts of peace. And while this was the position of the country, it would be very undesirable for any Administration to adopt a measure which would withdraw from their ordinary pursuits any large portion of the people. All they could well do would be to place upon the statute book the machinery necessary for the calling out of the full force of the Province whenever such force was required to defend the country; and in connection with this it was all-important to have a class of men distributed over the country fit to drill and command the men when they were called out.

Some Hon. Members—Applause.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—The latter was, in his view, the best and most important feature in the Bill of last session.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—They had now established two schools in connection with two regiments of the line, whose officers would instruct such young men as had a desire to perfect themselves in the military arts. A considerable number of Volunteer and Militia offices had already received certificates of qualification, and in the course of a few years it was to be hoped that a large body of young and vigorous men, in both sections of the Provinces, would be rendered fit to command the Militia when the exigency should arise, for them to take the field in actual warfare. He was forcibly struck with the remark made by an hon. gentleman in another place with reference to the lumberers in the Ottawa district. It was stated that there were there some twenty or twenty-five thousand men of stalwart frame and hardy muscle who were better fitted for Militia purposes than any other class of men. They knew how to provide for themselves in the bush, march over a rough country, make their camps, etc. There was no doubt whatever that they had in this Province the raw material for providing the best Militia force in the world.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—The two essentials then was a system by which the men could be called out, and men properly qualified to command  them. He believed the Militia policy of the Government would fully accomplish these objects.

Some Hon. Members—Applause.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—The hon. member for Sherbrooke, (Honorable Mr. Galt) in referring more particularly to himself, had remarked that something more than economy was requisite in the management of the Crown lands Department. He charged him with stopping emigration, discontinuing all the surveys, and the work upon Colonization Roads, and publishing to the world that there were no more lands fit for settlement in Canada. Now for every one of those statements, he had drawn exclusively upon his imagination. Many hon. gentlemen could testify that survey were still going on, and that progress was being made on a number of Colonization Roads. All the change that had been made in reference to the surveys was that all surveyors have been instructed not to survey lands that were not fir for settlement. If they went beyond this, they went beyond their instructions, and were liable to have their pay stopped as a consequence.

William Powell [Carleton] asked if the hon. gentleman pretended to say that the instructions were in any respect different from those under which the surveyors were formerly acting.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands] replied that if any such instructions had been previously issued, they had not been carried out, and no attempt, that he was aware of, had been made to carry them out. The cost of surveys during the five years before he took office had amounted to five hundred thousand dollars, and not one third of that sum had been expended to any advantage whatever to the country, and he thought it was high time that sort of thing was put a stop to.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—The charge that the Government had discontinued work upon the colonization roads was totally unfounded. They had gone on with all those roads which the official reports showed to be of any value to the country. That was a matter that was under control of the Legislature. No more money was spent than was voted for the purpose. The large proportion of the money voted last session had been expended, and the whole of it would be spent to the best advantage. He was satisfied it would be found that the money had been properly expended in both sections of the Province. The official reports would shortly be laid before Parliament, and the hon. gentlemen would have an opportunity of judging whether or not the works were being proceeded with in accordance with the intentions of the Legislature. Then it was charged that they had stopped immigration. That, also, was untrue. The only ground that could be supposed to exist for it was the fact that the Government had refused longer to allow gentlemen to travel through European countries, on pleasure trips, at the expense of the Province, doing more damage, in some cases, to the interests of emigration than good. Then, in reference to the statement about the good lands, he thought it was far better to state the truth than to deceive people. It was well known that the lands which formerly belonged to the Crown, lying along the north shores of Lakes Erie and Ontario, were sold, and that they were the best lands in the Province. For land of any kind belonging to the Government, settlers were obligated to go back into the region north of the back-bone of Western Canada; and in Lower Canada they had also to pass up into the higher portions of the country, some distance from old settlements. Hon. gentlemen might feel disposed to dispute this statement, but he was prepared to go to the surveyor’s notes and substantiate it. In reference, more particularly to what he had stated in his Report, it should be borne in mind that he was accounting for the diminished sales, and in doing so steed that the best lands had been taken up, and that consequently the price obtained, per acre. The statement with reference to the best lands having been taken up was strictly true.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—But he had not said that there was no good lands still at the disposal of the Government. With regard to emigration, he was well aware that several hon. gentlemen in the House took delight in advocating great schemes of emigration. His view of the subject was that emigration would be best promoted by governing the country well, and by carrying on public works in a judicious manner.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—The best emigration agents were those who came over to Canada, and finding themselves prospering, wrote home to their friends a good account of their adopted land. In the columns of a newspaper published in this city this morning, he had observed several such letters, which had found their way into the public prints in the old country, and which were calculated to do more to promote emigration than the best agent could do. Those letters, or emigration agents as they really were, would secure an influx of emigrants of the most desirable sort for the improvement of the country.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—It was not by gentlemen going to the old country with pamphlets, puffing Canada in the newspaper, and getting up a false state of expectation in the minds of the people, that a sound and proper emigration could be promoted. What had been done by the Cartier-Macdonald Government? Why pamphlets had been printed by the thousand and sent over the Europe, and a large emigration was the result. But what was the ultimate effect of that process? As hon. gentlemen from the principle cities of Upper Canada could testify, a large portion of such emigrants returned again to their native land, cursing Canada and the Government of Canada whose agents had raised expectations that could not be realized

He (Hon. Mr. Macdougall) had a considerable number of letters on file from parties who had been led to Canada by the promise that they would receive large grants of good land free, but on coming they found all such promises only delusive, and feeling that the Government had imposed upon them, they now called for indemnification, and for a fulfilment of the promise to give them farms of a good land free.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—Surely that was not a desirable state of things. The Government was not warranted in putting forth statements that were not in accordance with the truth. Let the Government attend to its proper and legitimate duties within its own territory, and if they do so, emigration of a proper character, and of a proper amount would flow into it. The Government would then receive all the emigrants that they could provide for. The hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] and others had also made a great flourish about the Government not maintaining its honor, and about its breaking faith with other countries. He seemed to have forgotten, for the time, the relations which we sustained [illegible] other countries and provinces. He seemed to fancy that Canada was an independent country, entitled to send ambassadors abroad, etc.

He (Mr. McD.) contended that the Government had kept faith to the letter and the spirit too, with the sister Provinces, and with its creditors. The Intercolonial Road question was a large one, and when the papers were laid before the House, and opportunity would occur for a full discussion of its claims. The Government had simply to say that they had done their duty in the interests of Canada, and in what they believed to be an honest and straightforward manner. After the convention of September, 1862, negotiations were opened with the Colonial Office, and conditions were imposed by the Imperial Government as a preliminary to pledging itself to give assistance to the project. One of the conditions insistent upon by the Duke of Newcastle was that a survey should first be made to ascertain the practicability and the cost of the undertaking. Canada agreed to the conditions, and was ready to unite in a scheme for a survey. But the New Brunswick delegates, for political reasons of their own, thought it advisable to put the cart before the horse—to have the road undertaken without knowing whether it could be made, what it would cost, or whether it could be worked after it was made. New Brunswick had an east, a west and a centre, as well as Canada, and those various interests had to be consulted before the Government could go on with anything of a practical nature. If those local difficulties had assumed such an importance as to prevent the progress of the scheme in the way that hon. gentlemen opposite seemed to think it ought to progress, the Government of Canada was not to blame for that.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—But for the peculiar and unexpected opposition of New Brunswick, the survey would have been agreed upon at first, before anything else was settled.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—But New Brunswick has offered to go on with the survey.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands] replied that the hon. gentleman knew very well the reason why Canada did not agree to the proposition of New Brunswick for a survey.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—They were political difficulties, I suppose.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands] replied that there were no political difficulties in the way of the Government of Canada. As the question now stood, he supposed that if New Brunswick threw any further obstacles in the way of the survey, it would proceed no farther. Unless the Lower Provinces were consenting parties at the least, the work could not proceed. That would be the end of it for the present. But it was presumed that New Brunswick would not object, and it was well know that Nova Scotia would not. The Canadian Government desired to go to work in the right way, as stipulated by the Home Government.

John Rose [Montreal Centre]—But you signed the Convention of 1862.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—Yes, but that was only a conditional arrangement, and was subject to the approval of the Imperial Government, which it did not receive.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay, Minister of Finance] suggested that the hon. gentleman for Montreal Centre [John Rose] signed the annexation manifesto.

Some Hon. Members—Loud cheers and laughter.

John Rose [Montreal Centre]—Yes, but I never turned round and argued against it, as the hon. gentleman had just been doing in reference to the convention.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands] replied that he supposed then that the logical conclusion was that he (Mr. Rose) was in favor of the annexation scheme now.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—All the Provinces had taken the ground that it was so far an Imperial question that that Government ought to lend its credit, and the Imperial government was willing, but new Brunswick wanted it done on the basis agreed upon in 1862—which basis that Province well knew had been repudiated by Canada. It might be thought that Canada went too far in 1862. If so the Government had succeeded in rectifying the error.

In conclusion, the hon. gentleman congratulated the House upon the improved tone which the debate had assumed, and on the prospect that they would soon be able to proceed to the real work for which they had assembled and to deal with the questions alluded to in the Speech from the Throne.

• (p. 62)

When they got to the real work of the session, hon. gentlemen would soon find out whether or not they would carry out the programme laid before the House. If hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House would go to work and assist them, they would be able to give a very different account of their measures from that which the Opposition predicted.

Some Hon. Members—The hon. gentleman sat down amid prolonged applause.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] arose for the purpose of contradicting and disproving the statement made by the Hon. Commissioner of Crown Lands [William McDougall] to the effect that he (Mr. Galt) had stated in 1862 that the deficit was five millions—The hon. gentleman quoted from his speech on that occasion to show that in mentioning the sum of five millions he had spoken of the amount which it would be necessary to provide; but that he had distinctly stated the deficit at $2,770,000, and that his (Mr. Galt’s) successor had stated it within a few thousand dollars of this.

David Price [Chicoutimi-Saguenay] had a few words to say in answer to the observations of the hon. Commissioner of Crown Lands [William McDougall], about the surveys. The hon. gentleman (Mr. McDougall) said that his policy was not to permit surveys of lands unfit for settlement. In reply to this, he (Mr. Price) could say that, in his own district, the role had been violated. For instance, the township of Boilleau was surveyed, though he was opposed to it, because he knew the land in that township was totally unfit for settlement; and he believed there would never be three bona fide settlers on it. The hon. gentleman remarked that the work of surveying was performed by Mr. Gagnon, the son of an hon. member of this House; and then went on to allude to the survey of the township of Labrosse, which was similar to the other township. In some places, such was the character of the country through which the surveyors proceeded, that they had to use roped to enable them to surmount the rocks.

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

David Price [Chicoutimi-Saguenay]—The hon. member repeated that he had written to the Department about it, but the surveys were nevertheless proceeded with.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands] was understood to say that the Department had acted upon the information of their own officers, and that they believed there was some good land in these localities.

Henri Taschereau [Beauce] said he was sorry to find that the hon. Commissioner of Crown Lands [William McDougall], in the course of his explanations, had not made any allusion to the working of the mines of gold and other precious metals in this Province. He did not mention this fact by way of accusation against the Government; but it would be desirable at the present moment to have some general information given, without of course giving details which would more properly come afterwards. Capitalists and speculators were already commencing operations; and it would be well if some general idea of the policy of the Government could be given.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—The policy is stated in the Speech.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

Henri Taschereau [Beauce] said that the fact the matter was there was to much policy in the Speech. This was just the time to give the information he (Mr. Taschereau) suggested. As the representatives of a gold district he felt it his duty to say so. It would be well for the country to have the information in question, so that capitalists and others interested might know in what position they stood.

John Rose [Montreal Centre] said that many companies had been formed for the purpose of exploring and working our mines, and, of course, they wished to know the policy of the Government. He hoped it would be made known at an early day.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands] said that, of course, the Government could not be expected to go into details just now. If the Address had been adopted at an earlier day, then we should have come earlier to the required details.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—But he (Mr. McDougall) did not think there was much in the way of exploration being done at this season in Lower Canada.

John Rose [Montreal Centre] said there was.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands] was understood to say that the matter would receive early attention.

Joseph Cauchon [Montmorency] thought it was almost cruel in his hon. friend from Sherbrooke to allude to the question of Representation by Population in connexion with the hon. Commissioner of Crown Lands [William McDougall], when we considered that that hon. gentleman had made such a full and open confession of the abandonment of that question which he once advocated to the extent of threatening an appeal to the United States. The hon. gentleman then alluded in sarcastic terms to the singular position in which the hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown] stood, in relation to this once cherished principle of representation. The hon. Commissioner seemed to taunt the hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] with not advocating this principle himself. But were we, on this side of the House, to be judged by the principles of others. Were we, when we attacked hon. gentlemen opposite for abandonment of principle, to be assailed, in reply, because we did not take up these cast-off doctrines ourselves. But the fact was this—hon. Commissioner used different logic on the Ministerial side to that which he had used while on the Opposition side. The sweets of office had given him a new light—he now saw that that right which he at one time wished to secure, even at the risk of a civil war, was impracticable. In fact, if we were to believed he had.

The honorable gentleman (Mr. MacDougall) had endeavored to take credit to the Government on the ground that the difference between the revenue and expenditure was only about a million; but, at the same time, be tried to attack the hon. member for Sherbrooke (Mr. Galt) on the ground that, in 1862, the deficit amounted to five millions.—

The hon. gentleman (Mr. Cauchon) then went on to read the extract from Mr. Galt’s speech, and showed how unfounded was the accusation. At the same time he analyzed the financial course of the present Government, referring to the loan from the Bank of Montreal. They boasted they had not to go to England; and, if they did not, what was the reason? Because they dare not go there; because if they went there they would be made to feel at once the result of their bad faith and their unsound policy. They had not settled our financial difficulties—they had only effected a temporary postponement, but the difficulty would come upon the country again at the end of three years. Of course it would be after the political reign of the hon. gentlemen, and they did not not care—they little recked what came—the acted upon the principle apres nous le deluge.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Joseph Cauchon [Montmorency]—On the part of the Bank from which the loan was obtained, it was of course a fair transaction; but it would be better, far better, for the Province if our position and our credit was such that the money could be obtained in England.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Joseph Cauchon [Montmorency]—As for the prosperity of the Province in a commercial point of view it was certainly not to be attributed in any way to the action of the Government, and they deserved no credit for it. This was due in a great measure to the success of the limber trade during the past year, and also to the great impetus given to the investment of capital by the great number of mining speculations.—The hon. gentleman then referred to his own personal experience as a public man in the past, and said that he, for one, had not drawn any unfair distinction between both sections of the Province; but had worked, to the best of his ability, for the advancement, development and prosperity of both. Referring to the North-West Territory, he argued that it was impossible to test the legal question, or form a legal opinion until we had full and entire information as to our rights in that direction. He would not go at any further length into the question now; but when it came up he would have something more to say about it.

The Hon. Commissioner of Crown Lands [William McDougall] had not entered into great details about the promised public improvements, but he spoke of them as pressing, and the doctrine of the Government appeared to be that, notwithstanding our financial difficulties, these improvements should be effected at once. Well, surely, if this rule applied to the West, ought it not also apply to the East? Why should we not have the Intercolonial Railway constructed, considered its necessity for a variety of circumstances, and considering particularly the fact that we were threatened with the abolition of the bonding system. But, it should be recollected that the policy of the Government, as enunciated on the floor of this House, when they entered into office, was such a course of retrenchment and economy—above and before all public improvements—as would bring the expenditure on a level with the revenue—position it had not yet reached.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Joseph Cauchon [Montmorency]—He (Mr. Cauchon) was strongly in favor of the improvement of our internal water communication, so soon as we were in a position to do so, because he believed that the St. Lawrence route was the true and natural trade channel from the West. On the Intercolonial Railway project, he denounced the Government policy as being of the most vague and useless sort, inasmuch as the survey could not lead to any satisfactory result, unless there was joint understanding or action. On the Militia question, he censured the conduct of the Government in using the Force as a means of attempting to strengthen their own ranks, and to punish their political antagonists. This was most discouraging, and was calculated to do serious injury. Now, the Government were in the habit of appealing to the loyalty of hon. gentlemen on this side, when they wanted to carry their measures; but what was the course of these hon. gentlemen when they were in Opposition? Not only had they combined to reject the Militia Bill; but some among their supporters were in the habit of contending that we did not want any defensive force; that we need all the energies of our population devoted to agricultural purposes—Hon. Mr. Cauchon next made a few remarks on the surveys, and the bad principle of political influence which so frequently ruled these matters, and by means of which men who were comparatively unqualified were employed. The hon. gentleman then touched upon one or two other questions, and concluded amid loud cheers.

The ninth and tenth paragraphs were then passed.

On the eleventh paragraph being put,

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] made a few remarks explanatory of the deficiency in the revenue referred to in his speech.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands] was willing to stand by the hon. member’s speech, which had been corrected by the hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] himself.

David Price [Chicoutimi-Saguenay] was understand to speak in reference to some survey heard in the gallery.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands] replied by stating: that the action of the Department had been taken on the information and at the request of gentlemen of the locality and that special instructions had been given, not to surveys lands unfit for cultivation. An experienced and reliable officer, Mr. Fletcher, who had been sent to examine the lands in question, reported that there was good land where the hon. gentleman (Mr. Price) had stated there was no land at all.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Henri Taschereau [Beauce] was desirous of being informed by the Hon. Commissioner of Crown Lands [William McDougall], what regulations the Government intended to make in reference to the Chaudiere gold fields. It was a matter of great importance to those who intended to engage in minding early in the season to know what those regulations were without any delay.

John Rose [Montreal Centre] also remarked that as several companies were now forming, it would enable them to complete their arrangements to much better advantage, if they were made aware of the regulations which were intended to apply to the mining districts.

David Jones [Leeds South] said he would have a few observations to offer, as well in reference to the Address as in reference to some remarks of hon. members opposite, though he would prefer that we should follow the English practice and allow the Address to go through with little or no discussion. But since the opposite practice prevailed here, of course statements and counter-statements would be made, and it was impossible sometimes to avoid taking part in the debate. In addressing the House he would endeavor to avoid personalities, because he considered that they were not interesting to the people nor creditable to use as a body.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—Therefore he would exclude from his speech remarks of a purely personal nature; but, at the same time, he would speak his mind freely. His motto had always been “Measures not men,” and this he was determined to adhere to. He was not in the House last evening when the Intercolonial Railway was discussed; but he had read in the Mercury of this morning the reply of the Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald] to a question put by an hon. member on this side of this House, which showed that the hon. Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald] must be altogether oblivious of former arrangements entered into, in connection with this project. The hon. gentleman said he here desired to explain that he took up this question first, as his views upon it had undergone some change. When he last spoke upon the project, he was opposed to it, because he considered that our condition and circumstances did not warrant us in undertaking it. Circumstances, however, had materially altered within a recent period.

He (Mr. Jones) had not anticipated, when he last addressed the House, the possible abrogation of the Reciprocity Treaty, inasmuch as it conferred benefits not upon us alone, but upon the United States also; and it was indeed strange that because of any misunderstanding between Great Britain and the United States, we should be made to suffer the spleen of the latter; and it was very much to be regretted that leading American politicians were to be found who sought its abrogation. This, however, being the case, rather than be at the mercy of the United States, who might actually shut us out from trade communication with the ocean or with Great Britain during the winter season, he would prefer to modify his opinions in order to meet the exigencies of the case; and he felt fully satisfied that he could justify his change on this point to his constituents.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear, and

• (p. 63)

cheers.

David Jones [Leeds South]—It became, therefore, our duty to as certain and understand the real facts of the case with regard to this question; and it was with surprise, as he had already said, that he learned the answer given by the Hon. Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald] when information was sought for relative to the survey. The hon. gentleman then read the reply in question, which was to the effect that Canada would proceed with the survey on her own responsibility, but that the sister-Provinces might subsequently assume responsibility on the terms of the basis of Quebec with regard to this point? Why, that no survey should be performed until the Legislatures of the respective Provinces had passed the laws embodying the conditions of the project; and then when all were bound in this manner—when none could back out, the line should be determined upon.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—The necessity of having the Acts passed, in the first place, must be evident to all.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—But indeed it appeared strange to him (Mr. Jones) that a preliminary survey should be at all necessary. The Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald] was also reported to have said that we did not know the distance. Why, that was determined in 1846 by Major Robinson, a British officer and a thoroughly skilful and competent engineer. He did not mean to infer that we had not skillful engineers in this country; but as we had no board of examiners for engineers, persons practising as such might or might not be clever and competent. This was instanced by the widely different engineers as to the cost of the same public works.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—Major Robinson, however, had been sent out by the British Government and was in every respect well qualified, as well shown by his report the fullness, accuracy and evident reliability of which was really surprising. That gentleman had examined the whole route throughout, and his opinion was to the effect that another preliminary survey was unnecessary.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—The Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald] told us that the distance was unknown. Did he not know that the distances were fully shown in Major Robinson’s report, and that there were now only 284 miles of the road to be constructed? Major Robinson’s report gave every desirable necessary information as to route, distance, estimate and other matter of detail. What was the object of the preliminary survey now proposed? The Imperial Government had not agreed to it nor had the sister Province.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—The hon. gentleman then referred to the anterior basis, by virtue of which the work was to be performed under the direction of five Commissioners. Under these circumstances, would the Imperial Government be bound by Mr. Sanford Fleming’s survey? The course now proposed to be pursued was in direct violation of the arrangements entered into by the delegates in England, and was contrary to the whole of the past policy on the subject.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—We were deliberately told that the basis of the 12th September, known as the Quebec Basis, had been cast aside. But hon. gentlemen on the Treasury benches should recollect an axiom they seemed to forget, namely: that there was more than one party to a bargain.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—How then could the Government of this Province pretend to set aside a contract to which New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and the Imperial Government entered into at Quebec contained one very important provision or statement. The delegates expressed regret that the Imperial Government had not accepted the proposal made by the Colonies in 1861. They were then of opinion that they had sufficient data upon which to proceed—not to consider the expediency of a survey, but actually to consider the means of constructing the railway.

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

David Jones [Leeds South]—A still more important provision, and one which sustained his (Mr. Jones’) assertion that the delegates considered the date already obtained sufficient, was the determination arrived at that no surveys were to be held until the Commissioners were appointed and the laws passed by the respective Provinces.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—It was strange, indeed, with all these facts of recent date before them, that the Government should send Mr. Fleming to survey.

The next question to which he (Mr. Jones) would refer was the very important one, of the opening of the Hudson’s Bay or North-West Territory. Now, he would here take occasion to remark, as well in connexion with this subject as with others, that it would be better for the Government to have a form of a speech drawn up, revised, corrected and patented for use on all future occasions

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

David Jones [Leeds South]—It might lack novelty, but it would have at least the merit of preventing them from retroceeding. This part of the subject, by the way, reminded him (Mr. Jones) of the story told of an Arctic explorer who had made a voyage in search of the North Pole. On his return he was asked if he had found the North Pole.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

David Jones [Leeds South]—He replied in the negative; but said he had found the place where the Pole ought to be; that it was a vast cavity through which the sun withdrew at night, and that it was worn very large by the constant passage of the sun.

Some Hon. Members—Roars of laughter.

David Jones [Leeds South]—So, the Government had been so often in and out through this North West question, and they had enlarged it to so such an extend, that he was afraid they would never beagle to close it at all. The hon. gentleman then ran rapidly through an historical sketch of the Hudson’s Bay territory from the grant to Prince Rupert in 1660, down to the transfer of the rights on a recent occasion, to the International Financial Association. On the latter occasion, when it was proposed to hand over these rights to a new company or corporation, it should have been the policy of our Government to interfere. They had, however, neglected to do so, for the question had been asked in the House of Commons, when the question came up, as to whether the Canadian Government had made any remonstrance, and a negative answer was returned. They had not uttered a word—not a sound of remonstrance.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—Doubtless, in answer to any representation which we might now make, the Imperial Government would tell us that we should compensate the new owners, inasmuch as we had not interfered in any way to prevent the transfer.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—Yet it was but a short time ago that the Government which had acted in this extraordinary manner on such an important question, actually entertained the wild idea of guaranteeing half the cost of a line of telegraph, which would extend some 1,800 miles through the yet unsettled, uncivilized country. The first proposal was to guarantee one-third but the delegates were so pleased with a complimentary letter written to them by Mr. Watkin, that they actually agreed to assume one half.

William Howland [York West, Receiver General]—We did not agree to do any such thing.

David Jones [Leeds South] went on to read the first letter over the signature of Messrs. Sicotte and Howland, the letter from Mr. Watkin, and the subsequent letter written by Messrs. Sicotte and Howland, in proof of his assertion.

William Howland [York West, Receiver General] was understood to explain that the proposal applied to interest—not to capital.

David Jones [Leeds South] went on to remark that he had not followed the Address in its regular order, but had, as he thought, improved it by beginning at the end and going through in the direction of the beginning; by putting it, in fact, not as it was but as it should be.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

David Jones [Leeds South]—With regard to our Volunteer Force, he begged to express his dissent from statements which had been made to the effect that it was a failure.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—Indeed it was only surprising, under the circumstances, that they had done so well.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—He (Mr. Jones) was in favor of the voluntary principle, inasmuch as he believed it was not the principle which was at fault, but the lack of encouragement which was to be blamed. He was of opinion that, with a proper system of encouragement we could have not twenty-five thousand, not third thousand, but a hundred thousand Volunteers. He referred to and condemned in strong language the circulars which had been send around for the attainment of a political end, namely, to secure the formation of volunteer companies so as to strengthen the hands of the Government on the question at the commencement of the session.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—The voluntary principle was deserving of encouragement, and it was unfair to quote arguments against it derived from the experience of the neighboring republic where the evil complained of arose from conscription and not from volunteering and they were not in many States returning to volunteering.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—It should be borne in mid, too, that the volunteer system was, in reality, that which was observed in the formation of the British army.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

David Jones [Leeds South]—By far the best means, however, of fostering a numerous and properly-trained defensive force, was to have military drill and discipline introduced into our public schools. It was desirable that the principles of any art, science, or branch of learning should be inculcated when young; and the rule applied equally to the military art as to others.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

David Jones [Leeds South]—Then there would be another advantage which should not be lost sight of. The combination of the manly exercise of drill, with the regular course of instruction, could not fail to give the scholars a healthy mind and a healthy body.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—From the actual education statistics we might have in the public schools of the Province 250,000 children going through a course of military instruction. See what an immense trained defensive force this would place at our disposal in five years.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—He would be very happy, however, to leave the whole matter to the Hon. Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald], who was well acquainted with the subject.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter and cheers.

David Jones [Leeds South]—The hon. gentleman alluded to the conduct of the hon. Solicitor General East [Lucius Huntington] in using the words “constitutional party” as a term of contempt. They had a right to use the name, and if they did so, there was, doubtless, some cause for their conduct. They did so, because there was a large number of persons, highly respectable and not open to any charge of disloyalty, who did not belong to the constitutional party, and who differed from that party as to the question of the Constitution. The hon. gentleman here referred to the Toronto Convention of the 9th November, 1859, to the resolutions passed on that occasion, and to the proposal made by that separate Governments with what was styled “some joint authority”. This proceeding was, in fact, copying the United States constitution without liking to say so.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

David Jones [Leeds South]—He (Mr. Jones) would rather see his party remaining out of power during the whole term to their natural lives, than consent to become party to an attempt to break up the glorious constitution under which we lived.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

David Jones [Leeds South]—The British Constitution was not the work of a day, it was the result of ages of experience—it had grown and matured throughout a period of eight hundred years, and yet men were to be found who, in an hour, would abolish that wise and venerable form of Government and substitute a written constitution after the American model. No, this should not bel and when such things were proposed, there was no blame, no censure to be attached to these who adopted the honored name of “the constitutional party.”

Some Hon. Members—Loud cheers.

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West] thought the Government was entitled to the compliments of the House and gratitude of the country for the great and important measures which were foreshadowed in the Speech from the Throne. He agreed with, and heartily supported the resolutions with the explanation he had vien respecting the Intercolonial Railway.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West]—He was quite surprised at the course pursued by the hon. member for North Waterloo (Hon. Mr. Foley). That gentleman had tried to prove the inconsistency of other members of this House in supporting the Administration, but all he proved was that he, himself was the most inconsistent of all. He had tried to show that members who were now supporting the Administration, had abandoned their principles, and that the Government was not entitled to confidence. But every vote he had given only showed that he, himself was inconsistent from first to last. When the Hon. Mr. Foley spoke of members on this side of the House abandoning their principles, he (the speaker) could see that he referred particularly to the matter of Representation by Population.

Michael Foley [Waterloo North]—Nothing of the kind.

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West] could say for himself that with the exception of leaving the matter of Representation by Population in abeyance, he was as warm on advocate of that measure as ever. The hon. member for North Waterloo [Michael Foley] was a member of the Macdonald-Sicotte Government until it was defeated. When the new Government was formed he was left out, and then his first opposition commenced.

He (Mr. S.) would submit to every member of the House, and to the people of Upper Canada who would be the judges of the Hon. Mr. Foley, whether his opposition was based on anything more or less than that he was not a member of the new Government.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West]—The last election took place in 1863, and afterwards the thing that interested members was, who should be Speaker. Among some of the members names as candidates, was the Hon. Mr. Foley, and while this agitation was going on, previous to the meeting of Parliament, there were several demonstrations in various parts of the country in favor of the Government. The point he (Mr. S.) wanted to arrive at was—at what time did the Government the hon. gentleman opposed to-day; rendered themselves unworthy of his support?

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West]—On the hustings the hon. member was opposed by a gentleman whom he (Mr. S.) supposed was now in his favor. (Mr. Scatcherd here read from a newspaper an account of the proceedings at the hustings, in which it was stated that in reply to a question from his opponent he avowed that he was a supporter of the Government.)

Michael Foley [Waterloo North]—From what paper are you reading?

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West]—From the Berlin Telegraph

Michael Foley [Waterloo North]—Then it is not true.

David Stirton [Wellington South]—I was present, and it is true, every word of it.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Michael Foley [Waterloo North]—The verbal testimony is worth about as much as the other.

Some Hon. Members—Oh, oh!

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West]—The hon. gentleman stated most distinctly that he was a supporter of the Government.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Michael Foley [Waterloo North]—He will find my address

• (p. 64)

to the electors in the same paper; by that I am willing to be judged, and not by the statements of newspapers in the interest of the Government.

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West]—If that paper was ever in the interest of any one, it was in none stronger than that of the hon. member for North Waterloo [Michael Foley]. That very paper which he says in unworthy of credence, is the one that supported him for the Speakership. It made no difference what he said in his address to the electors, it was what he said on the hustings; and up to that point he had been a candidate for the Speakership.

Michael Foley [Waterloo North]—I was not a candidate for the Speakership. I was merely spoken of.

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West]—After the elections took place, and before the House met in August, there was a demonstration got up in favor of my hon. friend the member for North Wellington [Thomas Parker], and Mr. Foley was an invited guest. Mr. Scatcherd here read the newspaper report of the proceedings, in which the Hon. Mr. Foley is reported to have said that instead of the three of a majority of the Macdonald-Sicotte Administration, there would be a majority for the New Government of twenty-three, and when the loose fish knew this fact for a certainty, the majority would be increased to thirty. Little did the guests at that time imagine who the loose fish would be.

Some Hon. Members—A laugh.

Michael Foley [Waterloo North]—Read the whole speech and not scraps.

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West] said he was charged with picking out scraps, but he only wished to show that of all the members from Upper Canada Hon. Mr. Foley was the most inconsistent. If that hon. gentleman thought that by reading the whole speech he could prove the contrary, he was welcome to do so.  At the same demonstration that hon. gentleman asserted that he “would not fight under the banner of Mr. Cartier,”

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West]—“that to be called an independent member was a perfect mockery.”

Michael Foley [Waterloo North]—Hear, hear.

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West]—He also said “that he adhered to the Reform party.” He also said, “the present Administration was composed of good men, and however unjustly he might be treated they had no stronger supporter than himself.”

Michael Foley [Waterloo North]—Hear, hear.

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West]—With what excuse could the hon. gentleman charge his friends from Upper Canada with supporting an Administration that had not the confidence of the country when he professed himself a strong supporter of the Administration? None knew better than the hon. gentleman who came from the same part of the country as he (Mr. Scatcherd) that the Administration had the confidence of the people of Upper Canada.

Michael Foley [Waterloo North] was understood to dissent from this opinion.

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West] went on to observe that if there was any one to blame for the Hon. Mr. Foley not being in office, it was not at any rate the fault of the party. He (Mr. Scatcherd) would like to see him in the Government, but he had as much confidence in the Government without that gentleman being in it. The party had all the same good feelings towards the Hon. Mr. Foley, but they all felt that his real objection was not the abandonment of principles, not the advocacy of the principles he could not support, but because he was not in the Administration. As far as the measures foreshadowed in these resolutions were concerned, they had his cordial concurrence, with the exception of what he had stated his position to be, in regard to the Intercolonial Railway.

Some Hon. Members—Applause.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West] said the House would remember last session, that he had moved for certain papers relating to the Intercolonial Railway project. He did so in good faith, and he desired to have the fullest and most reliable information, inasmuch as it was his belief that the Government had thrown it into the category of impossibilities.

He (Mr. McGee) was glad to see the hon. Attorney General East (Mr. Dorion) prepared to give a silent vote on the question. It proved that, after having withdrawn from the ranks of his colleagues—aye, even at the risk of embarrassing his party and allowing those horrid corruptionists once more to assume the reins of power—after having, so to speak, left upon the Intercolonial line, he had at least taken a return ticket and come back to his former friends on the same line.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter and cheers.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—The hon. gentleman’s conduct, no doubt, would be particularly gratifying to such a consistent politician as his hon. friend the Finance Minister [Luther Holton], who had approved of the conduct of the Hon. Attorney-General East [Antoine-Aimé Dorion]; but who now, like him, consented to set aside past principles. They were both instances of happy conversion, and it was to be hoped they would soon be confirmed.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear and laughter.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—What was the present condition of the Intercolonial Railway project in the maritime Provinces? Why, the hon. gentlemen on the Treasury Benches, by refusing to proceed unless New Brunswick and Nova Scotia consented to go back of what had been solemnly agreed upon, had succeeded in resuscitating a host of private and local questions in both maritime Provinces. They knew, or they should have known, that there were sectional designs and sectional interests there as well as here. They know, or they should have known, the state of public opinion there. They should have known that the abandonment of the Intercolonial line would at once advance the interests and prospects of the Pictou line. They should have known that local designs of an opposing nature, which would be necessarily defeated or set aside if the Intercolonial scheme was proceeded with, would be promoted in the most material manner if that scheme was abandoned. The charge against the Government was just this—they did not candidly abandoned it, nor had they honestly resumed it. Was there anything more ridiculous, anything more at variance with common sense than the present position of the Canadian Government. The Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald] plainly told us that the survey proposed last year was not proceeded with because the sister Provinces refused to go back of the contract on the basis of Quebec. Last autumn, the Government told these Provinces—“If you do not consent to renounce that basis we will not go on with the survey.” Now, however, the hon. gentleman and his colleagues were so anxious for a survey that they were going to force it on—they said “We are going to survey your territory as well as our own, unless you actually warn our surveyor off your frontier as a trespasser.”

Some Hon. Members—Laughter and cheers.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—The fact was, as he had already said, this vacillating and dishonest course on the part of the Canadian Government had had its natural result—it had galvanized into life a number of minor local projects which would eat up the means of both Provinces for many years to come.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—The Government of Canada, by their conduct, put weapons into the hands of parties in both of the maritime Provinces, who were opposed to the local governments—that had placed weapons in their hands to cripple the Governments who were willing to carry out the project in good faith.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—How inconsistent was the conduct of these hon. Gentlemen individually? They were opposed to the Intercolonial Railway but a short time ago, on the ground of the great expense it would entail—the burthen was too great, they could not bear it; but now they were quite willings to carry four Intercolonial Railways on their backs. They were quite willings to enter upon schemes which would involve a four-fold expense, including a grand canalization scheme, the improvement of our internal water communication generally, and the opening up of the North-West Territory.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—The hon. Attorney General East [Antoine-Aimé Dorion] in particular, must be vastly improved constitutionally, he must have grown wonderfully strong when he could bear a four-fold burthen. The question, therefore, which we should put to ourselves was just this—was it worth paying five-twelfths of the cost of this undertaking, in order to have access to the seaboard during five-twelfths of the year, for that was just about the length of time our communication with the ocean was stopped? Or were, we rather, to remain closed off from that access—were we to remain shut up in our shell during that period.

He (Mr. McGee) had read this evening, in a Kingston paper, and in the Toronto Leader, that the bill to repeal the bonding system had passed the House of Representatives. If such was the case, if it had gone through the popular branch we might consider the question as settled, for there was but a slender chance of its being saved in the upper branch. Here was a consideration which should be sufficient to decide the matter at once, but what other game did our Government of 1864 play? What other doctrines had they set aside—what other principles had they abandoned?

The hon. member for North Waterloo (Mr. Foley) had been charged with inconsistency by the hon. member for West Middlesex (Mr. Scatcherd.) Did the hon. member for West Middlesex [Thomas Scatcherd] recollect the eight propositions forming the political programme of the Macdonald-Sicotte Government, which had been read and explained on the floor of this House, on behalf of that Government, by two hon. members? Well, he (Mr. McGee) would consent to give up the whole case at once if the hon. member (Mr. Scatcherd) would show him any of these with exception of one—that referring to the Bankruptcy Law—which was acted upon by the present Government. Where he would ask were the remaining seven?

Thomas Scatcherd [Middlesex West] made some remark which was not distinctly heard in the Reporters Gallery.—He was understood to say, however, that this alleged abandonment was not the reason of the opposition of hon. Messrs. McGee and Foley to the Government.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West] went on to say that if hon. gentlemen sat down their principles in writing, they should not give them up or set them aside, without giving as solid reasons as they possibly could —without giving at least some explanations as to the grounds upon which they acted.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—Where was the measure for the adjustment of the representation now? It was a shame, an outrage on common sense that a great constituency like Huron and Bruce, with its numerous population, should be only represented by one member, while the petty, paltry little borough of Cornwall had also one member.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter and cheers.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—It was abused to say that the difficulty could not be settled. Every constitutional difficulty, under a constitutional Government, could be settled in a constitutional manner.  As the Hon. Postmaster-General [Oliver Mowat] had, on one occasion very truly remarked—“What were statesmen for, but to settle difficulties?” Questions as grave, as serious as that regarding the representation had been settled under the Constitution, and he (Mr. McGee) did hope that some day—some good day would come, when it would be taken up and settled to the satisfaction of both sections of the Province.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear and cheers.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—Where was the policy this House on behalf of that Government?

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—Oh, we abandoned it.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter and cheers.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—You abandoned it when you sought new inspirations—you abandoned it when you sat at the feet of the hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown]—you abandoned it when you formed new alliance, and obtained new associates.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—I would like to ask, is the principle of incidental protection to Canadian industry abandoned?

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—You said we abandoned it.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West] said he very naturally inferred it when the hon. Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald] called in a noted apostle of the Free Trade to be his Prime Minister. He (Mr. McGee) was in favor of affording all such incidental protection to our home manufactures as we possibly could without being burthensome to consumers. It was a duty which we owed to the country to encourage the domestic market. Now if the hon. member for West Middlesex [Thomas Scatcherd], who was understood to avow himself a incidental protectionist, supported a Government who had taken the step he (Mr. McGee) had just mentioned, who was inconsistent?

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—How strange indeed was the situation. Here we had the hon. Member for West Elgin [John Scoble] supporting the Government as a free-trader, and the hon. member for West Middlesex [Thomas Scatcherd] doing the same as a protectionist.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—It reminded him (Mr. McGee) of a learned Judge who, being on the Bench between two learned brethren who had just expressed contrary opinions on the case submitted to the Court, summed up the affair and gave his own opinion by saying that “he agreed with his learned brother Smith for the reasons given by his learned brother Jones.”

Some Hon. Members—Laughter and cheers.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—The hon. gentleman then made some remarks upon the vast increase and development of the manufacturing interests of Montreal, within the last few years; and consequently upon the necessity of the Governmental policy on this subject being made known.—He next referred to the question of North West extension, and spoke in complimentary terms of the hon. member for North Waterloo (Mr. Foley) for having, while in office, last year, particularly devoted his attention to this matter, and having drawn up a very valuable report upon it. The hon. gentleman went on at some length to refer to the great care and trouble Hon. Mr. Foley had bestowed upon it.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia] interrupted the hon. member (Mr. McGee) and said that, in his comments upon this subject, he was revealing Council secrets with regard to which he should have been silent

Some Hon. Members—Cries of oh! Oh! And ironical cheers.

Michael Foley [Waterloo North]—If the hon. gentleman were really liable to such a charge, he would have a notable example in the conduct of the hon. Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald] himself, as that hon. gentleman stated on the floor of this House that the policy of the Brown-Dorion Government on the Seigniori question was not as it had been stated by the Hon. Mr. Brown.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers and laughter.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—That wasn’t a Government secret. It was not at the Council—it was at my room in the Rossin House it was discussed.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Michael Foley [Waterloo North]—It was not the less a secret of the Government.

• (p. 65)

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—No; we were not sworn in at the time.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear and cheers.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West] made some further remarks upon the Hon. Mr. Foley’s report.

Michael Foley [Waterloo North] wished to remark that it was but fair to his colleagues to say that they had all voted for it.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West] after quoting some extracts from the report, said that it had lain on the table during one-third of the whole period of tenure of office of the Government, before they took it up; and now, after all, what was it they proposed to do?

Michael Foley [Waterloo North] said that from the date of its adoption to the present day, the most important fact connected with the report was that the Government had taken no action upon it.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay, Minister of Finance]—The hon. gentleman themselves did nothing about it when they were in office.

Michael Foley [Waterloo North]—Yes; a sum of $50,000 was placed on the estimates for the purpose of enabling the proper action to be taken; but the item disappeared when the new Finance Minister came in.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West] said there was yet one other fact of which he would remind the Government, and this was, that the report had only been brought down with great ill-will, and after repeated demands. The hon. gentleman quoted from the document to show that the hon. member for North Waterloo (Mr. Foley) in drawing it up, had made suggestions which showed the amount of diligence and zeal he had bestowed upon his work, and that the thanks he was therefore entitled to. Returning to the Speech, he said it was a Speech of magnificent distances and fine passages leading to nothing. It threw out a number of loops and lassoes to catch stray voters—in fact there was a question set forth to influence every district. It was altogether too prolific of good things—an embarras de richesses in fact. It was evidently not the work of the Attorney General, nor the Postmaster General, nor the Solicitor General, but the Promiser General, for he was going to give everything to everybody. He was like the negro who wished everybody was dead as he would then set up ship and sell everything to everybody.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers and laughter.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—There should have been something more explicit about our mines and minerals. In fact we should have a branch of the department of Crown Lands charged particularly with a matters of this kind. With regard to another notable omission from the speech—that of the subject of emigration, he (Mr. McGee) would take occasion to say that he totally dissented from the argument advanced that we, as a young country, desirous of obtaining settlers, by every means in our power, with old countries having a surplus population to dispose of. There were some other points to which he would have wished to refer; but as he had no desire to protract the debate, he would of course postpone to some future occasion when they came specially before the House. In conclusion, he remarked that he had been taunted with his volunteer advocacy if the people of the maritime Provinces; and in reply he had to say that he stood up for them on the floor of this House, because they were our fellow-countrymen, sprung from the same stock and born under the same flag as ourselves—because he was prompted by a sense of honor to stand up for the absent and to protest against the betrayal and machinations of the Government of this country towards them

Some Hon. Members—Loud cheers.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—All the remaining paragraphs were adopted, and the Address was finally carried without further discussion.

On the motion of John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia], the resolutions composing the Address were referred to a special committee. The Address was then reported front he Committee, and read a second and a third time.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia] said that before sitting down, however, he could not help remarking on the extraordinary course of conduct pursued by the hon. member for Montreal West [Thomas D’Arcy McGee] in charging the Government with inconsistency with regard to the Intercolonial Railway. That gentleman was in the Government, and had agreed to the basis of 1862; but he would ask that gentleman if he supposed that that arrangement could have been carried out at any time from that day to this. Did that hon. gentleman pretend to say it could be accomplished? He would ask if both sections of the country, or if the House were prepared to go on with the Railway until the survey was made? It was idle for the hon. member for Montreal West [Thomas D’Arcy McGee] to say that this Government had been guilty of a breach of faith with the Lower Provinces. He knew the contrary perfectly well. This matter was one which must be in accordance with public opinion.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East]—Submit your scheme to the House—you do not know public opinion.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—You never mistook public opinion!

A Member—The Hon. Mr. Cartier never cared for it.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—The hon. gentlemen would not be there to-night, in the cool shade of Opposition, if they had not mistaken public opinion.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—The hon. member for Montreal West [Thomas D’Arcy McGee] was endeavoring to mislead the Lower Provinces, when he charged the Government with having had it in their power to carry out the basis of 1862.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—Do I understand that the opinion of the House is adverse to the Government arrangement of 1862?

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—This House was not in a position since the last election, to have the scheme of 1862 submitted to it with any prospect of success. Would the honble. gentleman make his arrangement on the basis of 1862?

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—Had I made an arrangement with the Lower Provinces, I would feel wanting in my duty if I did not ask the opinion of Parliament.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—No doubt the hon. gentlemen would lie to see a course pursued such a would lead the Government into difficulties. The arrangements for 1862 were conditional on being adopted by the Legislature. But when the Government found that Parliament would not sanction the arrangement, the course to be adopted was clear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—You don’t know what Parliament would do now.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—We have gone to the country since, but where had there been any intimation from any quarter what member in his appeal to his constituents had advocated the Intercolonial, or any evidence that the Province was ready to incur a large amount of debt for the undertaking? Why, at the meeting at Otterville the Hon. John A. Macdonald expressed himself as unfavorable to the road.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East] was understood to express his dissent from this statement.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia] said it was well known, and he avowed it here, that he (Mr. John S. Macdonald) was in favor of that road; and there was no individual in Canada prepared to go further than he was in this respect. But it was not because he was in favor of the scheme that it could be carried out.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East] here made some observations which provoked the laughter of those in his vicinity.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—When the hon. gentleman laughs he has always a party of claquers to keep him company. It was the policy of the other side to raise as much confusion as possible when a member on the Government side rose to address the House.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—The Government were attacked because they wanted to put the Intercolonial Railway in a tangible shape; and show the people why, and how much they were to be taxed. The most reasonable course to pursue was to have the survey and the estimates. The Government had invited the Lower Provinces, and the Government had every reason to believe they would not only concur in the survey, but would also bear a share of the cost. But come what might, this Government was prepared to burden itself with the survey, so that all the necessary data might be procured. This Government has done its duty faithfully and honorably with the Lower Provinces. But if, through political considerations, New Brunswick had chosen to repudiate the arrangement of last year, on her be the responsibility. The Government of Canada had reason to know that the Executive of Nova Scotia was at issue with that of New Brunswick in regard to that measure, and to the conduct of New Brunswick.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—The delegates from the Lower Provinces seemed to desire that their Provinces should be fully committed to the scheme before any survey was made, in order to prevent any difficulties that might subsequently develope themselves from the information which would be afforded by the survey.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—Having thus briefly referred to the Intercolonial Railway question, and believing that every member of the House now fully understood the position of that question, from the remarks that had been made upon it by his hon. friends the Finance Minister [Luther Holton], the Commissioner of Crown Lands and himself, he now wished to make a few remarks upon quite a different subject, and in doing so, he trusted he would have the attention of every member on both sides of the House. He remarked that he was well aware that any man who took any prominent position in the politics of his country, thereby exposed himself to the shafts of slander and malevolence from his opponents. It seemed to have become the rule, in this country and in the United States, that the moment a [illegible] occupied a position of more honor than that of his colleagues and rivals, so matter what talent he might bring to that position, no matter what previous fair fame for uprightness of conduct and sincerity of purpose be enjoyed, he was open to the foulest attacks. He was certainly, however, entertained the idea that he might have been spared from such attacks by the gentlemen on the other side of the House, after cordial manner in which they had endorsed his political reputation, up to the defeat of the Macdonald-Sicotte Administration, as probably  equal to that of any man in Canada. His character was considered above suspicion, and he was freely spoken of as the only member of the Macdonald-Sicotte Administration that had taken office through the front door.

The reports of the debates, and the comments of the press for twelve months showed that, if there was any sincerity in the expression that feel from the hon. gentlemen opposite, and their organs throughout the country, the affairs of the country were in very good hands indeed. But since the defeat of that Administration, the tables had somehow taken a fearful turn, and from being one of the most honest and upright men in the country, he had suddenly become, according to the same authorities, a vile intriguer and corruptor of the Legislature and the country. He did not know what had been left unsaid with regard to the crimes of which he had been guilty, even to murder itself, since May, 1863. He supposed, however, that he was only suffering the penalty attached to the taking of any public political position. It was charged against him, among other things, that he had deceived His Excellency the Governor General [Viscount Monck], and he had got a dissolution granted to him by unfair means. But surely if that were the case, His Excellency [Viscount Monck] would have refused to hold any further intercourse with him after he returned from the elections. His Government was accused of having no policy, but if that were the case, he did not know that it was any discredit to him personally, or to the members of his Government, that the country had returned them with a majority of the representatives at their back, without a policy. They went to their constituents and they returned triumphantly—if you will, upon trust—notwithstanding the vile abuse to which they were subjected, and the damaging but unfounded statements and prejudices which the newspapers of the Opposition had let loose upon them and their friends.

Upon returning to the Legislature, it could not be forgotten that one of the means by which it was attempted to oust them from the Treasury benches, after the people had endorsed them at the polls, was to invent the grad story of the Grand Trunk bribe. But those who brought forward that bug-bear were shamefully defeated in their attempt to make capital out of it, and it had redounded to their sore discomfiture. That was a most shameful and disgraceful resort, and the House and the country had become fully convinced that it was groundless. No one now attempted to allude to it. It was concocted in Montreal and the Gazette of that city, the Grand Trunk organ, was sent down on an express train to be in before the vote, and he instrumental in snuffing out the Government. Notice of a motion on the subject was given by the hon. member for Kingston [John A. Macdonald] but when the time for him to proceed arrived, he withdrew the notice, against the protest of the Ministerial side of the House, and in the face of a challenge to proceed. The hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] took a leading position, last session, in hostility to the Government, and had endorsed by his silence the proceedings in the connection with those charges. He seemed quite willing to have it go abroad that his colleagues,. Messrs. Holton and Dorion, had been consenting parties, for a time, to a corrupt bargain.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—Does the hon. gentleman mean to accuse me of having brought forward the charge to which he alludes?

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia] replied that he did not say that the hon. gentleman had been guilty of making the charge, but that he was one of the acknowledged leaders of that side of the House, and he seemed quite satisfied with, and did not protest against, the proceedings of his followers in respect to those charges. The hon. gentleman sat in his place from day to day, and heard the charges brought forward and commented upon, and that was the occasion he ought to have taken to disavow all connection with them.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—Well, to relieve the hon. gentleman’s mind, I will say that I have never thought the matter was satisfactory explained.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East]—So say we all.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

• (p. 66)

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia] replied that it was quite enough to know that the hon. member for Kingston [John A. Macdonald] had put a motion on the notice paper, and then did not dare to proceed further with the charge.

Some Hon. Members—Ministerial cheers, and Opposition groans.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—The hon. gentleman had been challenged from his (the Ministerial) side of the House to bring up the motion, but he did not dare to do so. The investigation was declined because they were well convinced that it would result in a disgraceful defeat of the originators of the story.

Thomas D’Arcy McGee [Montreal West]—A certain private suppressed telegram had something to do with the withdrawal of the notice.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia] had never before heard of any suppressed telegram on the subject. A number of telegrams relating to it had been published, and he was not aware that there were any more that could throw light upon it. He was glad to hear the eulogium that his hon. friend opposite had pronounced upon the Hon. Robert Baldwin, but he well remembered the time when the great Conservative party charged him, after having undertaken a mission of peace, along with Sir Francis Bond Head, to the rebels, with subsequently inviting them to attack the city of Toronto. That gentleman had lived to have that charge fully and satisfactorily retracted, and cast out of the public mind as totally groundless. But this was only one of many infamous charges made against that eminent statesman. It seemed to be the invariable rule to trump up unfounded charges against the leader of an Administration, no matter what his character for integrity might previously have been charges too, that no hon. gentleman would ever think of bringing against any private member of the House.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—He (Hon. J. S. Macdonald) had become the victim, this session of another such plot as that concocted last session against his two hon. colleagues and himself. He would first allude, however, to the charge of improper conduct in the discharge of his duties as Minister of Militia. If he was innocent of any one thing laid to his charge in all his life more than another, it was the accusation so repeatedly made and harped upon by hon. gentleman opposite, that he had carried politics into the management of Militia affairs. On the contrary, the course he had pursued contrasted very distinctly, in that respect, with that of his predecessor.

When he (Hon. J. S. Macdonald) assumed the management of the Militia, there were nineteen military districts in the Province, and every single one of the Commandants of these districts was a Tory or Conservative. He defied the late Minister of Militia—the hon. member for Kingston [John A. Macdonald]—to show that a single man had ever been appointed as Brigade Major in Lower Canada who had ever given a vote for the Liberal party. In Upper Canada, three-fourths of the Brigade Majors that had been appointed were politically opposed to the Administration to which they owed their appointment. And when some one on his side of the House claimed credit for the Administration on account of the impartiality they had displayed in this respect, all the thanks the Government got for abjuring the politics in their appointments, was to be told that they could not find men of their political views who were competent to discharge the duties required. The Bill passed in 1862 provided that a Brigade Major might be appointed for every Militia District, with a salary of $600 per annum and travelling expenses. Last session, power was given the Government in the Act then passed, to put two or more districts into one, where there was little or nothing for a Brigade Major to do in one or more of the districts. This was rendered necessary owing to the circumstance that in some of the districts the Brigade Majors had little or nothing to do, and hence the salary was next thing to thrown away. But that Act did not permit the Government to increase or decrease, by a single dollar, the pay of a Brigade Major. In some sections of Lower Canada especially, the Volunteer movement did not succeed to the extent expected, and some of the Brigade Majors had little else to do than draw their salaries, and the Government resolved, in accordance with the policy of retrenchment, to dispense with the services of Major de Bellefeuille. In Upper Canada Colonel Light’s appointment became vacant by his death, and his district was added to that of Mr. Moffat, and a saving to the public funds of $1000 was thereby effected. A similar saving was effected upon the other side of the river, in attaching the 4th District to the 5th by the removal of Major Cater in Major de Bellefeuille’s district there was but eight or nine companies, and only one of them was outside of the neighborhood of Point Levi. That was one at Megantic, and that one he only visited twice during his incumbency. Reports with regard to the facts were laid before the Government, and it was resolved to attack his district to the 2nd. The question then arose which officer should be dismissed, and it was soon decided that Major de Bellefeuille, being the junior of Major Duchesnay, should be called on to retire. What was improper in that? Other charges were in contemplation, of a similar character, and they would be made as soon as the reports came in with the necessary information, and they would all be made solely with a view to economy, and to the promotion of efficiency in the service. He was well aware that the carrying out of such a policy, the dismissal of servants that were not needed, and that cutting down of extravagant bills, and the striking out of all improper charges in the accounts rendered for payment—brought down upon him the censure of the hon. gentlemen opposite and their friends; but he deemed it his duty to pursue that course, and he would continue to do so regardless of consequences.

Some Hon. Members—Applause.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—The Government, in carrying out their policy of retrenchment, had found it necessary to discharge several old public servants for whom there was nothing to do, and who had been for years drawing salaries without rendered the country and adequate service therefor; and the Opposition press had caught up and magnified every such case into frightful proportions; but such representations were often without any proper foundation, and were only made for the purpose of endeavoring to drive the reform Administration from power, in order that they themselves, might enjoy an opportunity of again feasting at the public crib.

Some Hon. Members—Applause.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—That they had the boldness to pursue such a course, and to lop off all extravagances in every department, and that they were continuing to do so, ought to be an all-sufficient reply to the charges to do-nothingism that had been made against them, and of want of energy and ability to adopt such measures as would satisfy the country.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—Two of the oldest officers in the service—veteran officers—had been dispensed with, yet no complaint had been made of ill-treatment. By these and the other recent changes a saving effected and the efficiency secured all went for nothing with hon. gentlemen opposite, and instead of supporting the course taken by the Government i this respect, they ran about trying to make all the political capital possible out of the dismissal, occasionally, of a friend of theirs. Of course it was, in almost every case, a political friend of their who was dismissed, because when they left office there was scarcely any other class of people employed by any of the departments.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—Then, with reference to the charge of bribery which had been preferred against him (Hon. J. S. Macdonald), he would remark that this much was certain, that no money had been paid, nobody bribed, and no one hurt.

Some Hon. Members—Laughter.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—He could not recollect every word he might have dropped last session, in joke or in earnest, but it was quite unreasonable to suppose that he would have made the proposition to Major de Bellefeuille that was charged, after he had stated that he had but the very slightest acquaintance with that gentleman, and had never met him since his appointment—and that appointment was in a sense imposed upon him—until he saw him in the lobby of the House last session. It was not at all probably that in meeting with a stranger by accident, not by design, he would make the proposition to him to go to an honorable member of that House and induce him to absent himself from a vote, and that he actually offered him a situation worth £500 a year for one night’s absence. Could anybody soberly believe that he was such a perfect fool as to do such a thing. And furthermore, the Government had, long previous to that alleged corrupt communication, resolved not to give the office alluded to anybody. That office, however, would not long be vacant if the Opposition came into power, and Col. Blanchet’s chances seemed quite as good to obtain it from his own side of the House as from this, even if it had been promised in the manner charged. It did seem to him that really preposterous to suppose that he would send a stranger to communicate in such a way with an hon. gentleman whom he was in the habit of meeting every day, and with whom he could communicate almost at any moment without danger of exposure by a third party. Major de Bellefeuille was dismissed only because his services were no longer required, and not for any other reason whatsoever. The whole object of this family compact who had assailed him, was evidently to concoct a scheme by which the Treasury Benches could be reached, and the £500 office placed at their disposal. He had never spoken to Blanchet before, nor since, upon any such subject, not even in jest, and he certainly would not have employed such an agency as that which he was represented to have done, in order to communicate with him on that sort of business. The offer is said to have been made some time during last session. If that were the case, and the member for Levi was really so much outraged by it as he now pretended to be, why did he not at once rise in his place like an honest legislator and repudiate the attempt upon his honor, and the man who made it?

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—What a God-send to the Opposition it would have been it this great revelation had been made last session, just before one of these close votes: Doubtless the Government would have been driven ignominiously from their seats by the storm of indignation that would have been raised against them, if the whole facts of the case had been given while they were fresh in mind. But the gentlemen who were affected by this and the after-dinner affair, quietly pocketed the affront and kept it carefully bottled up until the commencement of the present session, for the apparent purpose of assisting in the grand assault that was to end in the Opposition crossing the floor. But they had miserably failed in their object. He was accused of having invited gentlemen connected with the Opposition to his house, that he might take advantage of the privacy of such an occasion, to seduce them from their position on the floor of the House. He had had the honor and the pleasure of the company of gentlemen from both sides of the House at his dinner table, from time to time, and if the etiquette of society was held to prevent any gentleman on that floor who had ever dined with him from revealing anything that had occurred at his table of a political nature, he would fully absolve him from the consequences of a violation of etiquette, if he saw fit to reveal any such private political conversation. He submitted the question to any honorable gentleman on either side of the House, whether he (the Premier) had ever been known to refer to party politics at his table. Party politics were eschewed entirely at his family table, because he held to the belief that that was not the place for their discussion, or for any reference to them. With reference to the statements made by the member for Vaudreuil (Mr. Harwood) it had to be borne in mind that he was smarting under the same feeling, as his brother-in-law, Major de Bellefeuille. He had some recollection of tapping that honorable gentleman on the shoulder, in the hall, and saying by the way of badinage, something to the effect that the Government would survive, and he did not understand his best interests in voting against them. If the hon. gentleman received what he then said to him in the sense he now represented it, it was due to his character as an honorable man to have resented it at the time, or as soon thereafter as he could collect his scattered thoughts and put them in form.

Some Hon. Members—Hear.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—He ought to have said to him that although he had been well entertained at his (the Premier’s) house at all times, although he was fond of the music and conversation, and the cordiality and good feeling which always greeted him there, that he must forego all those enjoyments on account of the improper proposition made him last evening, or that evening, as the case might be. But he did do anything of the kind? Did he even silently absent himself from his (the Premier’s) house from that time forth? Nothing of the kind!

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—Perhaps it was unfortunate for him (Hon. J. S. Macdonald) that he had the habit of occasionally saying things to his friends without accompanying them with a serious face, and perhaps this would prove a useful lesson to him, in regard to making any good natured remarks on political subjects, to any of those who were in the habit of opposing him upon the floor of the House. Then the honorable member for Kingston, after listening to the divulgement of what ought to have been considered private conversation after having been kept secret for so long, went on in a fit of virtuous indignation to comment on the daring attempt at bribery of which he accused him. He was surprised that some, at least, of the hon. gentlemen on that side of the House should have borne with the hon. gentleman’s manner in silence. And so anxious was he to convict him of discharging Major de Bellefeuille from party political motives, that he pretended to quote a statement made to him by a Mr. King, a gentleman of whom he (Hon. J. S. Macdonald) knew little or nothing, and cared still less to know more of him. He had no recollection of ever speaking with him on this subject, but it was not improbable that he should have said, in his presence, that the Government felt themselves justified in dismissing any of their employees no matter what their political opinions, when their services were no longer required; but he was very certain that he never stated that the Government was justified in dismissing the public servants just because they were their political opponents.

• (p. 67)

Henri Taschereau [Beauce]—I say you did say to myself in Mr. King’s Presence.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—Now the hon. gentleman had got up and added another statement, beyond any he had yet made, just as Major de Bellefeuille had in his second letter, invented and given currency to a thing he never thought of at first. It was really wonderful the amount of inventive genius the gentlemen possessed. This, he supposed, was only the commencement of the new system of tactics adopted by the Opposition—the catching up of every casual observation, made without thought of their ever being reported again as earnest statements, and twisting and manufacturing them into something dreadful. To show how liable people were to be mistaken in endeavoring to repeat casual statements, he begged to read the report of Hon. J. A. Macdonald’s remarks in reference to what Mr. King told him, and then Mr. King’s own version of what had occurred (which passages have already appeared in the Mercury). If the hon. Member for Kingston [John A. Macdonald] was unable to repeat correctly what Mr. King expressly told him only a few days ago, how was it possible for gentlemen to state in such a positive manner as they had pretended to do, the very words used in a casual conversation of six months previous? Was it at all surprising, under such circumstances, that what have been stated wore a color that was never given to it at the time it occurred, or that things should be added to the story that had never transpired?

For his own part, he defied  any hon. gentleman to say that he had ever made any such charges against any member of the House as had been made against him during the past twelve months. In conclusion, he remarked that he was sorry if the hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] understood him to mean that he was in any manner instrumental in bringing up the charges of Grand Trunk bribery last session, as he only meant to say that he had acquiesced in the propriety of their being made by his failure to disclaim, at the time, any connection with them.

Some Hon. Members—Applause.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke], in a somewhat excited manner declared, that the statement just made to the House was by no means satisfactory to him, and was not such a course as he would have expected the hon. gentleman to take in reference to the charge of bribery of the Grand Trunk Railway. Those were not political charges, but they were made in the face of the people of Canada, and they ought to have been met by the Government with a full explanation and investigation. He would remark, moreover, that those charges related more to him (Hon. John S. Macdonald) than to his two colleagues, for one of the interviews was with him alone. And when the hon. gentleman undertook to say that certain members of the Opposition had made charged, he ought to have had a sufficient sense of honor to have stated that the leaders of the Opposition had a desire to prevent an indecent exposure.

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

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall, Premier, Attorney-General West, and Minister of Militia]—Heaven help us then, if we are indebted only to the forbearance of that side of the House for immunity from exposure.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke] went on to say that if there was one gentleman in Canada more than another against whom the making of charges of corruption, and corrupt offers, could be made and proved, it was the hon. member for Cornwall [John Sandfield Macdonald].

Some Hon. Members—Oh! Oh!

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—It did not lie in his mouth to appeal to either his past or his future conduct as a member of that House. As to those conversations, the hon. gentleman made nothing out of them. There was the direct statements of his (Hon. Mr. Galt’s) hon. friends, and the reply was that they were only badinage. When the attempt to seduce hon. members of the House from their upright and consistent course failed, then the unfortunate gentleman who had served as the tool for conveying the corrupt offers was cruelly deprived of his appointment, for no fault of his, but because his relations on the floor of the House were too honest to accept a bribe. What a pitiful defence the hon. Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald] had offered to the country for his conduct. He did not deny in the main, the correctness of the statements that had been made. He did not pretend to deny that he had some communication with the two hon. gentlemen on the Opposition side of the House, nor that Major de Bellefeuille was not properly qualified for the station he held. When it was found that his acceptance of a bribe, then it was found that the interests of retrenchment required his dismissal. The whole case was admitted. It was admitted that the offers were made, and everybody knew that Major de Bellefeuille had been dismissed. There was no doubt whatever, in his mind, that if it were not for the fact that his friends remained true, Major de Bellefeuille would have been the commandant of the two districts, instead of having been dismissed the service.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga, Attorney-General East] said he had no doubt that when the hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] came to reflect upon the statement that his hon. friend the leader of the Government had made to the House, and upon his own remarks in reply, he would feel that those remarks were uncalled for. The tone of his hon. colleague had not invited the most unjust aspersions that had just been cast upon him, and he had hoped that the debate was about to close without a repetition of those disgraceful scenes which characterized its commencement.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—Disgraceful scenes!

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga, Attorney-General East]—Yes, disgraceful scenes of which the hon. gentlemen themselves had been ashamed. Every one of them had felt compelled to apologize for them as they rose, one after another, to address the House during the past week. What were the facts in reference to Major de Bellefeuille’s dismissal? It was charged that the Minister of Militia [John Sandfield Macdonald] had dismissed him because his friends in the House would not support the Government; but after the statements that had been made by his hon. colleague, it was plain to the House that he was only dismissed because his services were no longer required. He was dismissed in pursuance of the policy adopted by the Government last session, and which policy was almost unanimously supported by hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House. Only two officers had been dismissed in Lower Canada, in accordance with the power placed in the hands of the Government at last session, and those were the two junior Brigade Majors then in commission. What reason was there for claiming any preference for Major de Bellefeuille? Why ought he to be retained while a senior officer was dismissed? The two Brigade Majors dismissed were the two who had the smallest number of companies under their superintendence, and he defied any man to show that their dismissal to show that their dismissal was not perfectly justifiable. The hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] in referring to the dismissal of Major Bellefeuille, had sought to manufacture political capital out of that circumstance. But the real question at issue was this—Could the dismissal of Major de Bellefeuille be justified on public grounds? This question was easy to answer, and the answer must be in the affirmative. And, if, before he was dismissed, some jovial remarks were passed, was the Government to be judged by whatever constructed the Opposition were pleased to put on these remarks? The hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] had referred to the allegations about the Grand Trunk. But did that hon. gentleman seriously intended to make any accusations against the government on this head? That hon. gentleman knew very well that the hon. member for Kingston [John A. Macdonald] had had a notice on the paper with reference to this subject, and when the day came the Government insisted on going on with it.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga, Attorney-General East]—When the discussion came up again he (Hon. Mr. Dorion) challenged the hon. member for Kingston [John A. Macdonald] to bring the subject forward.

Some Hon. Members—Hear.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga, Attorney-General East]—The hon. member for Sherbrooke [Alexander Galt] and others might choose their own time, but he (the speaker) would say that the Government would skirk no investigation on that or any other matter, when their personal honor was concerned.

Some Hon. Members—Applause.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga, Attorney-General East]—These Grand Trunk charges were got up for the sake of effect—they were part of a plot that was concocted to damage a Government the Opposition could not break down.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga, Attorney-General East]—These accusations were first published in Montreal, and brought down to Quebec by express in order to be used against the Government. But he would now state that the Government desired any investigations either inside or outside this House.

Some Hon. Members—Applause.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—Are the Government prepared for an inquiry by a committee into these accusations?

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga, Attorney-General East]—Certainly.

Alexander Galt [Sherbrooke]—Well, I would feel wanting in my duty if I did not put a notice to that effect on the paper.

William McDougall [Ontario North, Commissioner of Crown Lands]—There will be other committees too.

Henri Taschereau [Beauce] said the facts were before the country, and the statements made by the hon. members for Levis [Joseph-Goderic Blanchet] and Vaudreuil [Antoine Harwood], by Major De Bellefeuille, and by himself (Mr. Taschereau) were in reality uncontradicted; but even supposing a direct denial were given, he would be quite content to leave it to the country to decide, even if he (Mr. Tashereau) stood alone at issue with the hon. Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald].

Joseph-Goderic Blanchet [Lévis] said that if no action had been taken, he would have looked upon the statement made to him as a conversation. As it was followed up by action, he looked upon it as a message.

Some Hon. Members—Hear, hear.

William Powell [Carleton] said he had intended to speak upon the Address, but the time of the House had been so much taken up by other hon. members that he had been prevented from doing so, and would at present make only a few observations. He could not help [illegible] that the time was when the word of a Minister of the Crown was taken as a guarantee of truth. Now, unfortunately, that time had passed. He did not intend to discuss the question as to the guilt or innocence of the hon. Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald] la reference to the charges brought against him. He appealed to him colleagues and followers who had been outraged by the indecency of which he had been guilty, time and time again, in attempting to corrupt the pubic men of the Province, to say whether this conduct had been worthy of the head of the Government? It was notorious that this sort of thing had been carried on to a great extent by the hon. Premier [John Sandfield Macdonald]; and not a member of the cabinet by had felt degraded by it. It was desirable the debate should not close. Let the country judge whether the overtures made by him were a corrupt nature or not, or deserving of universal condemnation.

Some Hon. Members—Cheers.

Joseph Bellerose [Laval] proceeded to make some explanations in reference to the proceedings in connexion with the dismissal of Major de Bellefeuille, when he was interrupted by cries of “order”.

The Speaker decided that the discussion, ever since the adoption of the last clause of the Address, had been irregular.

Mr. Bellerose moved an amendment to the motion for adjournment, and went on to denounce the Government for their dismissal of Major de Bellefeuille.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay, Minister of Finance] rose to say that he believed the rumor alluded to by Hon. Mr. McGee, that a bill abolishing the bonding system had passed the House of Representative was unfounded, and that the rumor arose out of the fact that a bill referring to some local matter for the purpose of extending the time during which goods might be taken out of bond, in the United States, had passed the House of Representatives.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East] said a bill to abolish the bonding system, with respect to Canada, had been introduced into the House of Representatives, and referred to a Committee.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay, Minister of Finance] said he believed there was little danger of its being passed.

The House adjourned at two o’clock a.m.