Province of Canada, Legislative Assembly, Scrapbook Debates [Opening of Parliament], 8th Parl, 5th Sess, (11 June 1866)

Document Information

Date: 1866-06-11
By: Province of Canada (Parliament)
Citation: Province of Canada, Parliament, Scrapbook Debates, 8th Parl, 5th Sess, 1866 at 6-8.
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).

Click here to view the rest of the Province of Canada’s Confederation Debates for 1866.


MONDAY, June 11th, 1866.

  •             (p. 6)

The Speaker took the chair at three o’clock.

A number of petitions were presented.

George-Étienne Cartier [Montreal East, Attorney-General East] announced that the distribution of copies of the Civil Code of Lower Canada, would take place immediately. Lower Canada members, on both sides, would receive five copies each. Every Judge, Judicial Officer and Registrar in Lower Canada, and every Judge of the Superior and County Courts of Upper Canada one each. The work would also be offered for sale at $1.50 per copy.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga] said he considered the arrangements for the distribution of the work in every way satisfactory.

Joseph Bellerose [Laval], in moving the Address, said the honor conferred upon him of proposing the resolutions in reply to the speech from the throne[1], seriously embarrassed him. In fact, instructed as he had been, to address His Excellency the Governor General [Viscount Monck], the representative of Her Most Gracious Majesty, as the interpreter of the loyalty, gratitude and fidelity of the representatives of this country and of the people in general—honored as he had been in being permitted to speak for the first time in this magnificent Chamber, now fairly inaugurated—he felt that the duty imposed upon him was of such a nature as might alarm the least timid amongst them.

The zeal displayed by our volunteers, in flying to the frontier to defend our threatened homes and property, and the unfortunate death of those heroes among those who fell on the battle-field, fighting to repel the invaders, were subjects that certainly merited more eloquence than his humble abilities would permit. In any case he would accept the lot that had fallen to his share, and would proceed to the consideration of His Excellency’s [Viscount Monck] speech from the throne. The country might well feel proud of the magnificent buildings constructed in the city of Ottawa, for the accommodation of the Legislature of this Province, and they furnished true evidence of the prosperity of our country and of the brilliant future which awaited it. (Cheers.)

Providence has under many circumstances protected our common country, and our government having been, as it were, inspired to construct these buildings, was an additional proof of that protection. Because no sooner had these buildings reached a state of advancement when they might be regarded as fit for occupation, than the great question of Confederation of the Provinces had been brought to that state of maturity, which justified His Excellency the Governor General [Viscount Monck] in assuring the House that he has every reason to believe that the next Parliament meeting within these walls, will not only be a meeting of members of the Province of Canada, but will include all the colonies of British North America.

During the debate on the great question of Confederation, he had frankly declared that he was favorable to that union, and he would now say that he felt sure the great majority of the House agreed with him in a feeling of joy on learning that His Excellency [Viscount Monck] hopes that it will be possible during the present session to consider the details necessary to the completion of this great object. (Hear, hear.)

Passing to the paragraph relating to the subject of the Commerce of Canada with foreign countries, he remarked that the inhabitants of this country had every reason to be satisfied that the administration of the affairs of the country have under such circumstances been confided to the able hands of the gentlemen now composing the Ministry. (Loud Cheers.)

The report of the ministers sent to Washington on the subject of the Reciprocity Treaty[2] was a subject of legitimate pride, and the ability of those gentlemen was recognized by the whole press of the country. Their conduct, judged even by the great mass of the population of the United States, and the re-action in the views of eminent men of the neighboring Republic, proved that our statesmen were worthy of the confidence placed in them by the people of this country. (Hear.)

Moreover, the members of the administration deserved our praise for having resisted the feeling of hostility evinced by the American Committee with regard to the renewal of the Reciprocity Treaty[3], and for having immediately sent a commission to the West Indies and Brazil with a view of opening new avenues for our trade, and new markets for our industrial, agricultural and commercial pursuits. (Hear.)

The invasion of our territory by a horde of armed brigands had furnished the people of this Province an opportunity of showing their loyalty to the sovereign and its devotion to the noble flag under the shadow of which Providence has permitted its doctrines to be placed. It has frequently been the lot of the inhabitants of Canada to express their attachment to the mother country, but fifty years have passed since it as been their good fortune to show by their acts the sincerity of that attachment.

Our threatened frontier has lately furnished that desirable opportunity. The descendants of two great nations now guarding the destinies of the world,—they recollect their origin, and having read the pages of history devoted to an account of the heroic acts of their ancestors they feel that the same virtues have slumbered for half a century, but that they nevertheless still exist in their breasts. Scarcely had the telegraph wires conveyed to every part of the province the news of the invasion of our frontier than we learned that the contest had commenced, and that fifteen hundred of the invaders had been kept in check for nearly three hours by four hundred of our gallant volunteers who were waiting for reinforcements, and within twenty-four hours the gang of marauders were compelled to beat a hasty retreat. Deeds of valor were the order of the day, and more than one son of Canada sealed with has [sic] blood his devotion to his country. (Cheers.)

But why recall those sad reminiscences—they fell on the field of honor, and their death has added new glory to the flag of the gallant ‘Queen’s Own.’ Those brave men have acquired a right to the gratitude of the people of this province, and their representatives will hasten to prove that gratitude by providing for their bereaved mothers, wives and orphans. (Loud and prolonged applause.

Even yesterday, again the thunder of war re-enacted the echoes of Chateauguay. A short distance from the plains immortalized by the deeds of De Salaberry and his three hundred heroes, several thousand brigands made an excursion on our territory. Our troops—the worthy descendants of the brave veterans of 1812, were ordered to the spot, and their appearance was a signal for the rapid retreat of the enemy.—His Excellency [Viscount Monck] assured them that detailed accounts of the expenditure incurred by recent events would be placed before the House. He was happy they would have an opportunity of showing that the people were ready to place the whole resources of the country, whether in men or money at the disposal of the Government, in order that the invasion may be repelled, and the allegiance of the people of this colony maintained in its integrity.  

He congratulated the Government on the prosperous state of the finances, particularly, as during the past few years they had to complain of a large deficit, while this year the revenue exceeds the expenditure to such an extent as to justify His Excellency [Viscount Monck] in making the statement that there will be sufficient without inconvenience to meet uniform expenses. The constant and assiduous assistance given by the military and naval authorities during these troublous [sic] times, and the devoted courage of the officers and men of both branches deserved the thanks of the country, and when opportunity occurred proofs would be furnished of our gratitude. Finally let us hope that the proclamation just issued by the President of the United States [Andrew Johnson], commanding the repression of all infringement of neutrality laws will have the effect of relieving us from difficulty, and of bringing back our country to a state of peace. (Cheers)

Thomas Gibbs [Ontario South] rose to second the address, and in doing so expressed his approval of the sentiments uttered by the mover in such eloquent terms. He did not hesitate to say that he approached the subject with a good deal of diffidence, not only because of the many more able members he was speaking before, but also because this was the first assembling of Parliament seated in the splendid buildings erected in the Capital, which had been chosen by Her Most Gracious Majesty.  

The times also were exceptional, for just as they had been summoned to assemble, the country had been invaded by a band of lawless marauders, whose encroachment of our soil had been promptly repelled, and the spirit of the country aroused from one end to the other. They had all heard with pleasure of the assembling of a Council of Trade and that is deliberations had been attended with success, but he felt that until the papers connected with negociations at Washington were bofore [sic] the House he could not speak fully on the subject. The policy pursued by the United States, in so far as he had been able to judge, had been suicidal to its own people, and contrary to the spirit of the age. (Hear, hear.) That polic could only find its parallel in such countries as China and Japan. (Hear.)

One benefit had already arisen from the abrogation of the Reciprocity Treaty[4], and that was increased intercourse between the people of this country and those of the other British North American Provinces. He would say in concluding this part of the subject, he hoped that a better feeling would prevail among the people and in the Congress of the United States that would lead to renewed intercourse. The present position of our country was an exceptional one. For several years we had suffered from commercial depression and poor harvests, but last year by the blessing of Providence we had secured a bountiful harvest, and we could scarcely estimate the extent of the improvement that had had taken place in the circumstances of the people.

There was one pleasing feature in the recent events which they had been called upon to witness. The lawless horde which had invaded our country had proved to us that the spirit of the people was loyal and patriotic. When the telegraph wires flashed the news from one end of the Province to the other, not a heart wavered. Every one stood firm to his post and was ready to step forward and meet the foe. One instance he might mention which happened in his own constituency, that of a widow, Mrs. McKenzie, who cheerfully sent to the front five out of six of her sons, keeping the last one as a home guard. (Cheers.) He was sure the House would agree with His Excellency [Viscount Monck] in mourning for the gallant dead who had given their lives for their country. (Hear, hear).

With regard to the paragraph referring to the proclamation issued by the President of the United States [Andrew Johnson], he could only say that he exceedingly regretted that the proclamation had not been issued at an earlier date, as he felt assured if such had been the case much mischief might have been prevented. The Hon. member concluded by hoping with His Excellency [Viscount Monck] that the deliberations of the House […]

  •         (p. 7)

[…] might be directed by Divine Providence to wise and useful ends and resume his seat amid the applause of the House.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga] rose to ask explanations concerning the Ministerial changes that had taken place during the recess.

John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia]  said the time to enter upon these explanations would be when the Hon. Mr. Brown was in his place in the House.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga] contended that any discussion the address ought not to take place until these explanations were placed before the House.

John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia]  said that the Hon. Mr. Brown was expected to-night.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga] again said, that unless for some very important reason of which he was aware the discussion ought to be delayed if it was true that Mr. Brown might be expected within a day or two.

John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia]  considered that the address should be taken and considered on its merits without reference to Mr. Brown.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay] said, it had been the universal practice of Parliament to ask for and receive explanations of any Ministerial changes that may take place during the recess at the earliest possible moment, and that was immediately on the moving and seconding of the Address. This plan had in fact become one of the well understood practices of Parliament. It might be quite proper for the Government, out of compliment to Mr. Brown, to ask for a delay of the discussion until he took his seat, but the explanation was one to which the House was fully entitled. It was due not on account of Mr. Brown, so much as on account of the Government, and he thought at all events that the debate on the Address ought to be closed until these explanations were given.

John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia]  stated that out of courtesy to the member for South Oxford [George Brown], so long as it was well understood that he was about to take his seat in a short time, the Government positively declined to give one word of explanation. The only question that remained therefore was whether they should go on with the address, and he stated it was their intention to go on with it as they did not see wherein the explanations could affect it. It was well known that members generally were desirous that the Session should not be a long one. To delay therefore the consideration of the address would be to delay the business of the country and needlessly prolong the Session.

Thomas Parker [Wellington North] regretted the determination which the Government had come to in this particular. (He was rather indistinctly heard in the gallery.)

John Scoble [Elgin West] expressed similar views.

Christopher Dunkin [Brome] suggested that the address might go on, but the clauses referring to the Reciprocity Treaty[5] might be deferred until the member for South Oxford [George Brown] would be here. Were not this course followed the discussion would be extremely desultory and unsatisfactory.

John Cameron [Peel] said the Attorney General West [John A. Macdonald] had offered to act fairly on the subject. He had proffered his willingness to go on with the explanations just as soon as the Hon. Mr. Brown would take his seat. His (Mr. C.’s) view was that if Mr. Brown did not arrive to-night or to-morrow, then the explanations ought to be made because they were due to the House, whether some of the individual members affected were present or not[.] (Hear, hear).

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga] did not understand the Attorney General [John A. Macdonald] in the sense explained by the member for Peel [John Cameron].

Joseph Cauchon [Montmorency] understood that the Government would give those explanations just so soon as they may be necessary, but they did not see that the discussion upon the Address involved that necessity, yet if it did, they would be made.

David Jones [Leeds South] contended for the immediate giving of the explanations connected with hon. member for South Oxford [George Brown]’s withdrawal from the Government. He had heard that hon. gentleman himself say in the House that all minor questions were to be left in abeyance until the great question of Confederation was settled, and the House therefore had a right to know what great question had driven him from the Cabinet. (Hear.)

Arthur Rankin [Essex] had no objection to delay for a day the whole of the Address, but if all the other resolutions where carried but those referring to the Reciprocity question, he did not see why those should be deferred on account of the absence of one member of the House.

John Rose [Montreal Centre] said that any discussion of these explanations in the absence of Mr. Brown might compromise the Government, or the House, or the absent members, and he considered that the explanations might well be deferred until to-morrow or the day following.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay] again addressed the House, and created some amusement by asking the Hon. Attorney General West [John A. Macdonald] how he had spun out the debate on the Address in 1863.

John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia]  again repeated that on no account would the Government give any explanations in the absence of Mr. Brown, so long as it was understood that that gentleman would be here in a few days. As to the other question, the delay of the consideration of the Address, the Government declined to consent to that because it would be a criminal waste of the time of the House. The explanations could be given at any other time, either on a motion referring to the papers on the Reciprocity negociations or the English practice of making explanations on a substantive motion apart from any other question, but the business of the House ought not to be delayed on the frivolous pretence of waiting for explanations that could as well be made at another time.

Jean-Baptiste-Éric Dorion [Drummond & Arthabaska] briefly addressed to the House.

The first and second paragraphs were then agreed to.

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga] again objected to the going on with the paragraph, concerning commercial negotiations and the reciprocity, in the absence of ministerial explanations.

The third paragraph was then agreed to.

The question being put on the fourth paragraph,

Luther Holton [Chateauguay] pointed out the grave interests involved in the reciprocity negotiations, and thought the House ought to be put in possession of the circumstances which led to the change in the Cabinet, before being called upon to adopt the resolution.

John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia]  again indicated the course the Government intended to pursue, contending that the proper time for the discussion was when the papers came down.

The fourth, and several other paragraphs, having been agreed to, and the question being put on the 8th paragraph,

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga] made a brief, patriotic speech, advocating some measure of relief to those that were wounded in the late engagements, and to the families of those who unfortunately had lost their lives. (Hear, hear.)

The 8th and several other paragraphs having been carried,

Frederick Haultain [Peterborough] complained of the inefficiency of our militia system, and hoped some remedial legislation would be introduced.

John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia]  said, that in view of the early Confederation of the whole of British North America, in which there would be, as a matter of course, but one militia system, it was quite needless for this Government to interfere with present arrangements.

Christopher Dunkin [Brome] thought that something should be done at once to strengthen the militia organization of the country, for whether the danger from marauding parties was past or not, nobody on the frontier could be found to believe that the danger was over. He did not contend for a re-organization of the militia law, but he contended that some measure might be advantageously adopted to strengthen the force, to meet present the emergency.

Richard Cartwright [Lennox & Addington], while expressing his general satisfaction with the explanations of the Hon. Attorney General [John A. Macdonald], regretted the determination of the Government to defer the re-organization of our militia system until after Confederation, as they were thereby throwing away a splendid opportunity of carrying through an efficient system, that would command the hearty approval of the country.

Thomas Parker [Wellington North], while admitting the military questions of the kind to which he purposed to refer ought to be discussed with great delicacy, hoped that before the adoption of the twelfth paragraph, the House would be favored with explanations as to why the Volunteers went into action on a recent occasion without the field pieces which it was understood were ready at Hamilton, and should have been sent down to accompany them.

John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia]   hoped the member from North Wellington [Thomas Parker] would see the impropriety of discussing any question of the kind. From the day the Volunteers are called into active service they become as regular soldiers of Her Majesty, and he could not at this time enter upon any explanations on the point referred to.

Several paragraphs were then agreed to.

On the 20th paragraph being put

Luther Holton [Chateauguay] expressed his surprise that not a word had been offered in explanation of the disregard of the usual practice of the Government to call Parliament together in the early part of the year. Had this been done, the Government would not have been compelled to violate the Audit Act in making unauthorised expenditures.

John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia]  explained—The solitary particular in which the Audit Act had been violated, arose from quite unexpected circumstances which could not have been foreseen, and could not therefore have been guarded against.

Alexander T. Galt [Sherbrooke, Minister of Finance] stated that the very large expenditure which had been so unexpectedly thrown upon the county had been, up to this time, met by the excess of revenue over expenditure, (hear, hear) and though the daily expenses of the Government were now necessarily very large, he trusted that at the end of the financial year, three weeks hence, he would be enabled to repeat the same statement. (Hear.)

All paragraphs having been carried up to that referring to Confederation, the House rose for recess at a quarter to six o’clock.

The Speaker returned the chair at a quarter to 8 o’clock.

The question being put on the last resolution but one, that referring to Confederation,

Luther Holton [Chateauguay], asked whether it was intended to submit to this session of Parliament, the measure providing for the new constitutions for Upper and Lower Canada under Confederation?

John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia]  replied, that it was the intention of the Government to submit to this Parliament a measure, or measures, for the local government of Upper and Lower Canada under Confederation, but he was not prepared to say at what time, or on what particular day such measure or measures would be taken up.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay] desired to know whether this Parliament was to frame the new constitutions for the local government.

John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia]—the hon. member for Chateauguay [Luther Holton] should understand that our pesent [sic] constitution was framed and put in force under authority of the Imperial Parliament, and the new one must be imposed by the same authority. He believed that the Imperial Parliament would generally adopt the recommendations of this and the other Legislatures of the Provinces, in framing the new local constitutions, but it would only be competent for this House to proceed by resolution, leaving to the Imperial Parliament to give legal effect to our recommendations. 

Luther Holton [Chateauguay] asked whether the government intended to adhere strictly to the terms of the Quebec resolutions of 1864[6], or whether it would assume the power claimed by Nova Scotia to send Delegates to England and consider the whole question at a new conference to be held there.

John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia]  replied in the first place they had no authority to proceed by act of Parliament to set aside the old and impose a new constitution. That was the prerogative of the Imperial Parliament. But whether by bills or whether by resolution there was no doubt but the will of the people of Canada as expressed by Parliament would be fully and fairly carried out by the Imperial Government. In so far as the Quebec resolutions[7] are concerned, he could only say that they were adopted by the representatives of the Provinces and next by the parliament of Canada and forwarded to Her Majesty as the deliberate choice of the government and peopel [sic] of this country.  

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga] said holding the views he did in the scheme of Confederation adopted two sessions ago, he could not hail with satisfaction the announcement in the speech that the scheme was almost being carried out. Mr. D., went on to argue against Confederation because it had never been wished for by the people, because it would affect seriously our relations with the mother country, and because though passed by a large majority of the House, yet that majority had held diametrically opposite views but a short time before. He concluded by moving an amendment to the effect that the House deemed it its duty to express the conviction that Confederation should not be imposed until the people had first had an apportunity [sic] of expressing their opinion on the measure.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall] seconded the amendment

John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia] said that the question of Confederation had been fairly and fully discussed and thoroughly understood and approved of by the people at large. The hon. member by pressing his motion to a vote now might deprive himself and his friends of the opportunity of discussing the measure at the proper time, as if he loses his amendment, the rules of the House might be invoked against his bringing it up again.

Christopher Dunkin [Brome] could not agree with the last speaker entirely as to the effect of pressing the amendment to a vote though he deprecated discussion upon any question when it was not fairly up before the House. He disapproved of very many of the provisions of the Quebec Scheme[8], but he thought this was not the time to discuss it, and preferred to see the Government left unembarrassed either by speech or motion until the time when the whole question would be placed before the House for a full and final decision.

A desultory debate took place as to the effect […]

  •         (p. 8)

[…] of the amendment.

John Sandfield Macdonald [Cornwall] spoke against the Quebec resolutions[9] as a proper basis for Confederation. On the Committee appointed to consider the constitutional difficulties of the country the Hon. Attorney General West [John A. Macdonald] no doubt remembered that they had voted together in favor of Legislature Union of such a union he was still in favor. He could not therefore permit the resolution to pass the securing to sanction what he felt bound to condemn[.] The hon[.] member spoke at some length against Confederation and in favor of the amendment.

Christopher Dunkin [Brome] did not see that anything was to be gained by the mere substitution of one paragraph for another. He protested against the system of compelling members Sessions after Session to vote upon all sorts of propositions in amendment to the Address. The correct and certainly the simples plan was merely to vote nay on the paragraph. He had voted against ammendments [sic] for the reasons he had said before, and he would do so now [.] (Hear.)

Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga] replied to Christopher Dunkin [Brome] explaining that this object amendment was to pledge the House to submit the question to the people.

Luther Holton [Chateauguay] briefly addressed the House and the yeas and the nays were then called for on Antoine-Aimé Dorion [Hochelaga]’s amendment. While the members were being called in,

John Macdonald [Toronto West] was permitted to address the House. His views had undergone a material change since he last addressed the House, though he was still opposed to the Quebec scheme[10]. Then we had a Reciprocity Treaty[11], now we have none; then we were at peace, now we were almost at war. Besides, the English had expressed so much anxiety to see Confederation carried out, and as that was the only country he knew in the world which would put forth its whole strength to defend its humblest subject, he would not assume the responsibility of voting against the Address.

The vote was then taken, when the amendment was lost.

YEAS,—Biggar, Bourassa, Caron, Coupal, Dorion, (Drummond and Arthabaska) Dorion (Hochelaga) Dufesne, (Iberville), Fortier, Geoffrion, Holton, Houde, Labreche-Viger, Lajoie, MacDonald, (Cornwall) Macdonald, (Glengarry), Paquet, Perrault, Poulliot, Rymal.—19.

NAYS,—Alleyn, Archambeault, Ault, Beaubien, Bellerose, Blanchet, Bowman, Bown, Brousseau, Burwell, Cameron, Carling, Cartier (Attorney General), Cartwright, Cauchon, Chapais, Cockburn, Cornellier, Cowan, De Boucherville, Denis, Dickson, Dufresne, (Montcalm), Dunkin, Dunsford, Evanturel, Gaucher, Gaudet, Gibbs, Harwood, Haultain, Higginson, Howland, Irvine, Jackson, Jones (North Leeds and Grenville), Knight, Langevin, Le Boutillier, Macdonald, (Attorney General), MacDonald, (Toronto West), MacFarlane, Mackenzie, (Lambton), Magill, McConkey, McDougall, McGee, McGivern, McIntyre, McKellar, Morris, Morrison, Munro, McMonies, Parker, Pinsonneault, Poulin, Powell, Rankin, Raymond, Remillard, Robitaille, Rose, Ross, (Champlain), Ross, (Dundas), Scoble, Shanley, Smith, (East Durham), Somerville, Stirton, Street, Tremblay, Walsh, Webb, Wells, White, Wilson, Wright, (Ottawa County), Wright (East York).—79.

The remaining clauses of the Address were then agreed to.

On motion of the John A. Macdonald [Kingston, Attorney-General West and Minister of Militia]  the Address was read a second and third time and passed, and a Committee appointed to wait on His Excellency [Viscount Monck], and present the same to-morrow at half-past 3 o’clock, p.m.

The House then adjourned at a quarter to ten o’clock.


[1] The Speech from the Throne took place on 8 June 1866 and can be found on p. 1 (1866) of this volume. 

[2] Report of Minister of Finance on Reciprocity Treaty with United States (Quebec: 1862). For the treaty, please consult: Canadian–American Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 (Elgin-Marcy Treaty). The treaty expired in March, 1866.

[3] Canadian–American Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 (Elgin-Marcy Treaty). The treaty expired in March, 1866.

[4] Canadian–American Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 (Elgin-Marcy Treaty). The treaty expired in March, 1866.

[5] Canadian–American Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 (Elgin-Marcy Treaty). The treaty expired in March, 1866.

[6] All drafts of the Quebec Resolutions from 1864 can be found at and soon, in our upcoming volume. For the version of the resolutions that passed the House, they can be found in this volume, Legislative Assembly, 13 March 1865, pp. 1027-1032.

[7] Ibid.

[8] The version of the Quebec ‘Scheme’the Quebec Resolutionsthat passed the House can be found in this volume, Legislative Assembly, 13 March 1865, pp. 1027-1032.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Canadian–American Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 (Elgin-Marcy Treaty). The treaty expired in March, 1866.

Leave a Reply