Province of Canada, Legislative Assembly, Scrapbook Debates, 8th Parl, 5th Sess, (15 June 1866)
By: Province of Canada (Parliament)
Citation: Province of Canada, Parliament, Scrapbook Debates, 8th Parl, 5th Sess, 1866 at 12-15.
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).
FRIDAY, June 15th, 1866.
The speaker to the chair at three o’clock.
Several petitions were presented, and a large number received and read.
Several standing Committees brought in their first reports, the purport of all being to reduce the quorum.
A number of bills were introduced and read a first time; Second reading ordered for Monday and Tuesday.
Honorable A.T. Galt gave notice that on Tuesday next he would move for a special Committee to take the subject of the interest of money into consideration.
Honorable A.T. Galt also gave notice that on Tuesday next he would move that the House go into Committee of the whole to consider the expediency of indemnifying the Government for the unavoidable departure from the provision of the audit act, occasioned by the maintenance on active duty of the volunteer force; Which the Government has been compelled to call out, and which has involved an expenditure to a large amount provided for by the votes of last Session.
Honorable John a MacDonald said, Before the orders of the day were called and in accordance with the arrangements of yesterday, he proposed to call the attention of the House to the changes that had taken place in the administration since last Session. The explanations, as far as the Government is concerned, will be very short and simple, and will not interrupt the business of the House. It is known that since the last Session, the president of the council resigned his seat in the cabinet, and at his position was assumed by the hon. Mr. Blair. It was also known to public rumour, that the member for sale in Oxford retired upon difference of opinion, with the majority of the council, on the subject of the reciprocity treaty — in regard to the best mode of renewing, conducting and continuing negotiations respecting the renewal of the treaty with the United States and the British American provinces.
Well, the majority of the council after a long and careful discussion of the whole subject came to a certain conclusion as to the best policy to pursue under the circumstances. The hon. gentleman who resigned could not conscientiously assume, responsibility for that policy, and hence his course on the occasion. The subject in question had occupied the attention of the country for a very considerable time — indeed ever since the hon. gentleman entered the coalition cabinet it engaged continuously and systematically the attention of the Government. In December last, members of the Government who were all here except the provincial secretary, then absent on a commercial mission, come [sic] to a conclusion upon best mode of conducting negotiations with the United States for the renewal of the old treaty or for securing by some other Arrangement, advantages which flowed to this province and the United States from the Treaty of 1854.
The papers to be laid before the House shortly will give all the information respecting the proceeding with that object , and the policy of the Government on this matter. The hon. member to the great regret of his colleagues could not agree to that policy, and declined to accept the responsibility of being a party thereto, though we considered it best calculated to secure […]
- (p. 13)
[…] advantages which we believed would accrue to both countries by the renewal of the treaty.
The Government, I repeat, deeply regretted that the hon. Mr Brown should deem it his duty to adopt the course he did on that occasion, then you could not in accordance with the conscientious view of what was both politics and right, yield to the opinions of the rest of his colleagues and remain in the council. After a considerable amount of exertion to induce the hon. Mr Brown to yield his opinions to those of the majority, he declared he could not and decided to resign. The only thing that remains to be done was for the administrator of the Government to accept the resignation, and for the Government to take steps to fill up that they can see.
The House knows that the hon. gentleman did not hold a common or ordinary position in Government. — he was not only a minister holding office, like the rest of his colleagues, but was a representative of a great party. He was leader of the liberal section in the cabinet which came into office with himself for the purpose of affecting a great object, which is now, I’m happy to say, near its completion; and it is an additional source of regret that the hon. gentleman is not now in the Government to see as minister the accomplishment of the great object for which the cabinet was formed, for which he sacrificed so much, and work so patriotically. (Cheers.)
I repeat, his absence from the Government is a matter of sincere regret to all his colleagues, and must be also to most of the members of the House. I need not say that it is only in a case of this kind, when a public man’s personal honour is concerned, that when he assumed the responsibility entering the Government, he could properly withdraw from it. It was only when he could not as a public man, conscientiously be responsible for the course which the Government had made up its mind to pursue, that Mr Brown then took the course, which, as an honest man, he felt bound to pursue and what he considered was for the welfare of the country. At that time the head of the Liberal Party having resigned, I with consent of my colleagues and the approbation of the administration of the Government, invited the postmaster general, to assume the responsibility of filling up the vacancy caused by Mr. Brown’s retirement. He stated he could not do so before seeing his friends . The following is the memorandum on the subject:
Memorandum of Facts.
Mr. Howland stated into the council, that by the resignation of Mr Brown he was placed in a position in which you felt that great responsibility rested upon him, and that before coming to a decision as to whether he should continue in the Government, he felt it to be his duty to consult and obtain the advice of those members of both Houses of the legislature, who belong to the reform party. Pending this, he would decline to take any part in the proceedings of the council, he therefore ask the consent of the council to the step he proposed. This consent was accorded, and a letter was at the same time placed in Mr. Holland’s hands, which read as follows:
Executive Council Office,
Ottawa, December. 20, 1866.
My dear Howland, —
I have only time before you leave to say to you that the policy of the coalition Government will in no respect be changed by the resignation of Mr Brown, that all the conditions entered into at the time of the coalition Government will be fully carried out; That I ask you to take Mr. Brown’s position in the Government, and that you have carte Blanche in the choice of a gentleman of your party to fill the vacant seat in the council.
In haste, sincerely yours,
John a McDonald
The Hon. W.P. Holland,
P.S. — when I speak of the conditions on which the coalition Government was formed, I of course refer to the original arrangements under Sir Etienne Tache, and to the continuation of them when Sir N.F. Belleau became Premier.
The hon. Mr. Howland, after seeing his friends, determined to remain in the cabinet himself and endeavour to fill the vacancy, and the result was that the hon. Mr. Blair was induced to accept the presidency of the council. He accepted office with the consent and approbation of his party, as I understand, and now holds office. This is, as far as the Government is concerned, all the information we can allow on this subject. The whole of the paper is connected with the negotiations in respect to the reciprocity treaty will be laid on the table in a few days for the satisfaction of the House. (Cheers.)
Hon. George Brown — before proceeding to enter into explanations on the subject of his retirement from the Government, desired it to be distinctly understood that his resignation was entirely on account of the course which had been pursued on the question of the renewal of the reciprocity treaty. He was bound to admit that no slight cause would justify him and leaving the Government before the great question of Confederation, for the carrying of which he had taken office, had not been finally disposed of.
At the same time he thought that Confederation had even then reached that point when no danger of its failure, need have been apprehended. He had entered the Government with very great reluctance and would have preferred, as he had stated at the time, to have remained on his own side of the House and sustain the gentleman opposite in maturing the great question and carrying it to a successful issue. He thought it still that it would have been the proper course for he and his friends to have sustained the Government from their own side of the House, than to have joined in the Government, and he was still prepared to give the Government his hearty and cordial support to carrying out that measure. With regard to the occasion of his leaving the Government, the policy on the reciprocity question, the matter in connection with which led to his resignation, was the negotiations of Canada with the United States. It was in the course pursued by the honorable Minister of Finance, that he had found his reasons for the course he had taken. He was glad however that the policy on which he had resigned had not been carried out, and thought his resignation had done some good in preventing that policy from bearing fruit.
The hon. gentleman opposite knowing he (Mr. B) was present, had not thought fit to give his view of the case, and he beg to stayed before entering up on it, that he had left the Government in perfect friendship and without any difference or disagreement on any other questions than that of reciprocity. As the attorney general has stated that question was before the cabinet from the time of the formation of the coalition Government, and on the 15th July 1865 feeling it necessary that the Government should know what were the views of the United States Government administers might come down and meet the House with a statement of policy, it was proposed to send a deputation to Washington.
A long discussion took place upon this point, the council did not agree upon it, but on applying for the document it could not be found. A deputation was sent to Washington to ascertain the views of the American Government. We were satisfied with the treaty, they were not; Therefore they should make a proposition to us and not us to them as a basis for renewal of negotiations. The result of that mission was at the American Government desired some arrangement with regard to certain articles in which a great deal of smuggling was carried on from this country to the United States, and he was perfectly satisfied to enter into an arrangement of this kind from first to last period during the last Session of Parliament on a discussion on the enlargement of the canals, the honorable Minister of Finance had made some remarks which he supposed members would recollect in which he did not hesitate to say conveyed an idea of the policy of the Government.
(Mr. B) then read from Mr. Galt’s speech showing that enlargement of canals would only be nice policy for Canada as an inducement to Americans to renew the &c.)
The ministry last year had suggested to the Imperial Government the propriety of consulting The British American colonies in any negotiations that might take place for a renewal of the treaty. The British Government had agreed and appointed the intercolonial council of trade. The Canadian ministers who are members of that council or the hon. attorneys general East and West; Hon. A.T. Galt and himself (Mr Brown.)
He held in his hand the resolutions which had been agreed upon at that council, after a full discussion, which it was proper he should read.
Mr Brown read resolutions to the affect [sic] that the colonies were satisfied with the present treaty, but willing to enter upon a new one upon any reasonable basis, that in any new treaty the coasting trade should be included ; And in case of the failure to negotiate before the 17th of March , then the Imperial Government should be appealed to, to get a renewal of the then existing treaty for a brief period, to enable negotiations to be carried to a successful issue.
These resolutions were agreed to on the 17th September last. Shortly after that time the Department were removed to Ottawa, the cabinet meetings were held in Montreal, so that properly speaking, the Government had no abiding place.
On the 17th November he had gone to the lower provinces, on a mission connected with our trade relations and shortly after his return to Toronto he had been surprised to see in the American papers, a statement that Messrs. Galt and Howland, who had been sent on a mission to New York, to confer with the Internal Revenue commissioner, were negotiating with the Committee of Ways and Means, in Washington. He thought there surely must have been some mistake, as no authority has been given our delegation to make any propositions, and he feared this step would have a most dangerous effect on the lower provinces, and even be detrimental to the prospects of Confederation, as indicating that Canada desire to act without consulting the other Governments equally concerned. It was desirable to know exactly what had taken place, and though he had no doubt his hon. friend had acted in the best of faith, still, from the course pursued, had it not been for the great question of Confederation, he (Mr. B.) would not have stayed in the Government one hour.
Mr. B here read the following memorandum:
When the council met Ottawa on the 13th December, Mr. Galt give a full narrative of his proceedings in the United States, but did not submit it to writing. I asked him to do so, but he thought it unnecessary — which I think is to be regretted. He stated that he met the commissioners at New York and arrange with them, that they should report to their Governments in favour of renewal of the reciprocity treaty, and the years extension of the existing treaty, to enable a new one to be arranged by the commissioners.
He also stated he had agreed with them for the assimilation of duties during the year, so as to prevent or at least render unprofitable smuggling on the border. Mr. Galt then went on to say that after seeing the commissioners at New York, he proceeded to Washington where he saw Mr. Seward and Mr. McCulloch. He said both were very friendly, and deprecated any interruption to our Commerce, but that Mr. Seward declared no new treaty could be made, and that only reciprocal legislation could be assented to. Mr. Galt said he combated this proposal , and shewed the difficulty of getting all the provinces to consent to reciprocal legislation — to which Mr. Seward reply that he did not care about the lower provinces, it was an arrangement with Canada he wanted. Mr. Galt said he urged that the fishery question could not be arranged except by treaty, to which Mr. Seward replied that he did not care about the fisheries, and also that could be separately arranged.
The result was that Mr. Galt preceded to discuss with Mr. Seward and McCulloch (separately I understood) the arrangements possible under reciprocal legislation. He suggested to them that such manufactures of the two countries as the United States might designate might be admitted free, provided the same articles from England were admitted into Canada free. He suggested that all the natural products of the 2 countries should be admitted free, with this exception, that when the Americans impose an excise duty on articles made are grown in their country, they might impose an equal customs duty on the same articles coming in from Canada. He suggested that our inland waters and canals might be made a highway, common to both countries, and maintained at the joint expense of both. He suggested that the customs duties on foreign merchandise of the two countries should be assimilated as far as possible, and when the rate of duty was the same in both countries, such articles should pass free from country to country, and a settlement be made between the Government at the end of each year, on a balance of accounts from the customs entries on the lines.
Other suggestions were made by Mr. Galt equally important, and all likely to cause much agitation in the provinces. Mr. Galt followed up his narrative, by proposing that a minute of council be adopted endorsing what he had done, And authorising him to proceed to Washington and continue his negotiations.
A discussion of several days followed. I contend that Mr. Galt had no authority for going on to Washington, and had acted most indiscreetly in making such suggestions, even on his own personal responsibility. That what he did was done in direct opposition to the deliberate decision of the Government and Confederate council, and calculated to be most seriously injurious to us in the coming negotiations, I intended that even had Mr. Galt full authority for going to Washington, and had the council not previously determine the line of discussion to be then adopted, the action taken was worse than folly. Mr. Galt had flung at the heads of the Americans every concession that we had in our power to make, and some that we certainly could not make — so that our case was fore closed before the Commission was opened. Every suggestion he had made would be regarded as a boon we were seeking, and our eagerness in making them would convince the Americans more than ever that we were and that we thought ourselves at their mercy.
But I went on to cost and that the worst part of the matter was all these sacrifices were to be made to secure ” reciprocal legislation ” that is, an act of Congress and an active Canadian legislature which either might repeal at any moment. I pointed out the astuteness of these suggestions on the part of the United States Government — that it simply meant an […]
- (p. 14)
[…] arrangement by which the Americans could get over their present difficulties and have our Aid in collecting their revenues—the one sole thing they were then bent on — and after that hold are people dangling from year to year on the legislation of the American Congress — looking to Washington instead of Ottawa as the controller of their commerce and prosperity knowing as well as I did the determination of leading United States public men to absorb the provinces into the union, I pointed out how admirably this scheme was designed to attain their end, and what our position we would be in, with the public mind excited before each meeting of Congress by articles in the United States press, threatening ruin to our trade, and resolution proposed in Congress by protectionist members .
I also pointed out the effect all this would have on the lower provinces. Here had Mr. Galt been settling the basis of a new treaty without one word of communication with the sister colonies —nay, in direct opposition to what they had determined was the best course to pursue. I told my colleagues what had been done by the Confederate council — but I was bound in honour to stand by the course taken by and the promises made to the members of the Confederate council. I expressed my fear that the great offence would be taken if Mr. Galt’s proposal were persisted in, and that result might be the loss of Confederation as well as reciprocity. I stated that I could not be responsible for Mr. Galt’s proposed order in council, and for his continuing the negotiations alone, and if it were insisted on I might leave the Government.
I was asked to state what course I suggested. I said, treat Mr. Galt’s proceedings at Washington as unofficial, call the Confederate council together and at once, by Telegraph, and commence anew. Make a dead set to have this reciprocal legislation idea upset before proceeding with the discussion, and if you fail after every exertion has been made to restore the proposal for a treaty — then, before breaking off all negotiations, ascertain the conditions proposed, for the purpose of seeing whether all the present advantages of our position should be sacrificed for a boon dependent from day to day on American whim.
I endeavoured earnestly to impress my colleagues with the dangerous nature of this reciprocal legislation. I pointed out that, until Mr. Galt met Mr. Seward, such an idea had never been broached by anyone. I pointed out also that, apart from its political effect, no extension of the scope of the treaty would be worth much that was capable of repeal at any moment. Who would put his money in any enterprise that might be knocked on the head at a month’s notice? I also reminded them that even in the United States those friendly to the reciprocity, and were striving for its renewal, would be equally dissatisfied with us as such an unreliable arrangement.
Mr. Galt, after consulting with others, made a suggestion for a compromise. He consented that his proceedings at Washington should be treated as unofficial — that no order in council be passed on the subject, and that he and Mr Howland be sent down to Washington to secure a treaty if they could, but, if not, to find the best terms that could be got, and report to Government without delay, for their approval. I replied that I quite understood this as intended to strike my name from the Confederate council of trade, and place Mr. Howland in lieu of it — that I would not on that account object to the proposal, but accept the compromise.
I supposed the matter settled; But Mr. Galt then proposed that a second draft minute he had placed before the council should be adopted. I said I thought no minute whatever was to be passed, and , on his reading what he proposed now to be adopted, it appeared that the document referred to Mr. Galt’s mission to Washington, endorsed his policy, and , instead of calling the Confederate Council together, ordered that an intimation of what had been done, and what was proposed to be done, should be sent to the Governments of the lower provinces, so that they might, if they chose , send representatives to Washington.
On pointing out these objections, a clause was added, intimating that a meeting of the Confederate council would be held, when Messrs. Galt and Howland returned from Washington.
He (Mr. B.) had not been able to read the first memorandum, though he had applied for it, but could not get it. That was the reason why the explanations had not been given yesterday, and not as stated in one of the papers, but he required time to refresh his memory. Had both minutes been withdrawn he would have been satisfied, but as only one was withdrawn and the other being substantially the same, he could not consent to undertake the responsibility involved in agreeing to substituting reciprocal legislation for the provisions of the treaty. The secretary of the Treasury had more than a week to repair his report, after his conference with our finance minister, and even in their report the objection of the treaty being unconstitutional, was not so decidedly put as in Mr. Galt’s report.
The secretary only said there were grave doubts whether such treaties were not unconstitutional as infringing the rights of Congress to legislate on all matters of Commerce, and he (Mr. B.) was surprised that his hon. friend should have fallen in with such an absurd proposition. It was a mere delusion to suppose that there could have been any constitutional objection to the treaty, because the United States had made twenty treaties of a similar import since the one of 1854. Having fully considered this matter, and having viewed in the light of an improper concession to the United States, being of opinion that the Minister of Finance was not authorised to proceed to Washington and offered terms on behalf of Canada, and believing that reciprocal legislation would be no rightful substitute for the treaty, he had come to the conclusion that it was his duty to resign his position in the Government.
Having decided upon this step, he then considered how he should carry it out. There were two ways — one to place his resignation at once in the hands of the leader of the Government, the other to wait upon the administrator of the Government. He, considering the peculiar circumstances under which he had entered the Government, considered it his duty to adopt the latter course, and lest there should have been any appearance of discourtesy to his friend at the head of the Government he at once sent his resignation to the Premier. His Excellency the administrator had received him with great kindness, indeed he would never forget the consideration extended him on that occasion.
After explaining the whole matter the administrator said “Then Mr Brown I am called upon to decide between your policy and that of the other members of the Government? ”
He (Mr. B.) replied, ” yes, Sir, and if I am allowed to give advice in the matter, I should say that the Government ought to be sustained. Though the decision is against myself I consider the great question of Confederation as a far greater consequences to this country than reciprocity negotiation. My resignation may aid in preventing their policy on the reciprocity question from being carried out or at least call forth full expression of public opinion on the subject, and the Government should be sustained, if wrong in this, for the sake of Confederation.”
Mr Brown continued that he was as much in favour of a renewal of the reciprocity treaty as any other member of the House, but he wanted a fair treaty, and they should not overlook the fact, while admitting its benefits, that the treaty was attended with some disadvantages to us. Contended that we should not have gone to Washington as suitors for any terms they were pleased to give us. We were satisfied with the treaty and the American Government Should have come to us with a proposition since they not us desired a change. There was something in building up a great country besides mere commercial advantages, and he did not desire that by a system of reciprocal legislation Canada should be bound to sail in the wake of Washington.
Honorable A.T. GALT in rising to reply said he objected to the hon. member for South Oxford basing his reasons for resignation upon the action of anyone member of the cabinet. You had listened to the hon. member throughout and from one end to the other it appeared that his sole cause of opposition to the policy of the Government on the reciprocity negotiations was himself (Mr. Galt).
To this he (Mr. Galt,) objected, as whether he had been duly authorised or not to proceed to Washington, from the day that his conduct had been sanctioned by the cabinet of which he was a member he ceased to have any personal responsibility in the matter apart from his colleagues. He was surprised, therefore, that the hon. member should have singled him out as the cause of difference between himself (Mr. B.) and the Government. The course which had been followed, whether correct or otherwise, was the course authorised and agreed to by the executive council, and from that time it seems to be a matter of individual responsibility.
He (Mr. Galt) considered at his position in the Government fully entitled him to have gone to Washington, even without any special authorization, if by that means he believed he could serve the interests of the country, but he had been fully authorised to go there. During the time the council was sitting, Government was in constant receipt of important documents relating to the movements of the Fenians, and the attorney general had given him some papers relating thereto, to lay before the president. He mentioned this circumstance merely to show that it was understood he was going To Washington. Regarding his action as a member of the Government, the hon. member should not have taken special notice of him, but treated the questions solely as one of difference with the Government.
He (Mr. G.) did not comment on the present occasion, purpose going into a Discussion of the differences of opinion between the hon. member for South oxford and the Government, but he was not prepared to say that the hon. member’s course was preferable to the one the Government had adopted. It was absurd, perfectly absurd, to hold the abstract idea of a treaty, and nothing but a treaty. When the Americans had said that we could not have a treaty, we should then endeavour to gain the same ends by other means. With regard to the danger of looking to Washington, he would discard it altogether, for had anybody believed in that danger, we had given them such an answer within the last few weeks as would dispel any thoughts of the kind. The hon. member had complained of the want of a document which he desired to read to the House, and he (Mr. G.)would now read the document in question.
(Mr. G. here read the memorandum.)
The Minister of Finance has the honour to submit , for the consideration of his colleagues in the Government, that the approach of the period when, under the notice given, the reciprocity treaty will expire, renders it necessary to consider the steps to be taken to procure such an extension of the notice from the Government of the United States, as will afford time for fully considering and arranging the best mode for establishing permanent regulations for the trade, navigation and intercourse between the United States and Canada.
Under these circumstances, and with the view of defining the general limits the discussion of the question of reciprocity with the American authorities call it appears necessary to decide upon the principles by which the Canadian Government would be guided in case it should become necessary to proceed by concerted legislation.
The Minister of Finance, therefore, respectfully recommends that the following points be now settled, as expressing their views of the administration in regard to the commercial relations of Canada with the United States:
1st. — in the event of the Government of the United States declining to make a Treaty of Commerce with Great Britain, as regards Canada and the other British North American provinces, the Canadian Government are willing to endeavour to effect such arrangements by concerted legislation, as will establish such regulations, as it may be mutually agreed upon to adopt.
2nd. — Canada would be willing to agree to the reciprocal interchange of the natural productions, shipping and manufacturers of both Countries, provided she were not required in any case to impose differential duties in favour of the United States.
3rd. — Canada would be willing to place the navigation of the Great Lakes and the St Lawrence on a footing of perfect equality, and hereafter to consider the best mode of perfecting the canals, so as to afford the greatest possible facilities to the trade of the West .
If practicable, the coasting trade of the two countries should be made reciprocal , and the regulations for the transit trade made permanent and satisfactory.
4th. — with the view of preventing illicit trade, Canada would be willing to agree upon and assimilation of the excise duties upon spirits, beer and tobacco, end of the customs duties upon the same and cognate articles. She would also willingly consider any suggestion by the United States, for the extension of such assimilation to other articles, provided the settlement of the whole commercial relations between the two countries be made upon the principle of perfect reciprocity , and the greatest freedom afforded to the citizens of both countries, to purchase and sell in the markets they may prefer.
5th. — Canada may state that the maritime provinces are prepared to Unite with her in the discussion of all the subjects arising out of the Aggregation of the reciprocity treaty, and she therefore desires that the negotiations should be carried on with commissioners appointed to represent the several provinces. But as such negotiations could not possibly be completed before the 17th March, Canada suggests that the notice for the abrogation of the treaty be withdrawn, pending negotiations, reserving, however, to both countries, the right of imposing customs duties upon any or all of the articles enumerated in the free list, in the fourth article of the treaty, provided the same do not exceed the duties now levied by the Internal Revenue Acts of the United States; Or, if necessary, Canada would accept a declaration from the United States, that they will not act upon the notice given for the abrogation of the treaty, other than to impose such duties as aforesaid, upon the productions of British North America, and will not consider such duties as inconsistent with […]
- (p. 15)
[…] the Reciprocity provided by the Treaty, which shall, in all other respects, be held to be in force.
6th. — if no other course can be taken for obtaining an extension of the treaty, the Canadian Government are prepared to recommend, at the next Session of Parliament, the enactment of such measures as may meantime be agreed upon with the American Government, provided the legislation of both countries be made concurrent and reciprocal.
(Signed.) A.T. GALT, M.F.
16th December, 1865.
Mr. Galt continued — he (Mr. Galt) was sorry that circumstances had compelled him to say a single word on these explanations. — he had no desire to enter into the discussion of the question at issue. When the papers came down, hon. members would be better able to understand and discuss this subject than at present.
Hon. Mr. Howland felt the great responsibility attached to the position when called upon by the hon. attorney general West to bring another member of his own party into the Government. But the fact of his according with the policy of the Government, and the great question upon which the coalition had been formed being still unsettled, had induced him before coming to a decision as to his own course, to consult with his political friends, and he found it was their desire that he should remain in the Government/ Having been charged by the attorney general to fill up the vacant office, he had preceded west, and having solicited the member for Lambton to accept the presidency of the council, that hon. member declined. He then called upon the hon. Mr. Blair, and was happy to say that hon. member had willingly agreed to enter the Government.
Mr. Mackenzie said the explanations of the hon. postmaster general were quite correct and satisfactory, except that it had been stated that the explanations of the hon. member for South Oxford might put matters in a different light. When the vacant seat in the cabinet was offered to him (Mr. McK) he said he desired to consult with the late president of the council, through a third party, and he found that the passing of the minute in council, on which Mr Brown had resigned, was but the concluding act of a long contention, and that personal animosity had had a very great deal to do with it. (Hear, hear.)
He did not intend to discuss the questions of policy at issue in these negotiations, but he could not but remark that it was his impression that the commercial policy then proposed by the Government, if carried out, would have led to a more intimate political union with the United States. With the permission of the House, he would read a memorandum of the negotiations, in so far as he was concerned.
(Mr. McK. then read his account of the interview with Mr. Howland, and the subsequent information he had acquired as to Mr. B’s retirement , and continued.)
He should never regret that he had declined the high honour of a seat in the executive council, if that seat were to be gained by concessions to the Government of Washington. There might be greater misfortune befall a man than to be excluded from this Government, and there might be greater blessings than to become a member if it.
Hon. Mr. Galt then moved the House into Committee of supply, Mr. street in the chair.
On motion of Hon. A.T. Galt, it was resolved that a supply be granted Her Majesty. The Committee rose and asked leave to sit again.
On the order of the day, for the second reading of the interest bills, Messrs. Dunkin and Bourassa, in view of Mr. Galt’s motion for a Committee to consider the whole question, allowed the bills to stand, and the House adjourned a few minutes before six o’clock.