Document Information

Date: 1860-05-15
By: Province of Canada (Parliament), The Globe
Citation: “Provincial Parliament. House of Assembly”, The Globe (16 May 1860).
Other formats:

Provincial Parliament

House of Assembly

Quebec, May 15

The House met at 11 o’clock.

Superannuation and Annuity Bill.

Mr. Sherwood moved the second reading of his Pensioning Bill.

Mr. Brown moved the six months’ hoist.

Negatived 55 to 44.

Yeas. – Messrs. Aikins, Bell, Biggar, Brown, Bureau, Burwell, M. Cameron, Clark, Connor, Dorion, Dorian, Drummond, Ferguson, Finlayson, Foley, Gaudet, Gould, Harcourt, Holmes, Labelle, Laframboise, Lemieux, A. P. McDonald, McDougall, McKellar, Merritt, Mowat, Munro, Notman, Papineau, Patrick, Piche, W. Powell James Ross, Rymal, W. Scott, Short, Somerville, Stirton, Thibaudeau, Wallbridge, White, Wilson and Wright.

Nays. – Messrs. Abbott, Alleyn, Archambeault, Baby, Benjamin, Buchanan, Burton, J. Cameron, Carling, Caron, Atty. Gen. Cartier, Chapais, Cimon, Daly, Dawson, Dionne, Dufresne, Dunkin Ferres, Fourtier, Fournier, Galt, Gill, Gowan, Harwood, Hebert, Jobin, Laberge, Lacoste, Langevin, Loranger, Loux, Macbeth, Atty. Gen. Macdonald, MacLeod, McCann, Meagher, Morrison, Ouimet, Panet, Playfair, Pope, Price, Robinson, Roblin, Rose, R. W. Scott, Sherwood, Simard, Simpson, Sincennes, Tasse, Tett, Webb, and Whitney. – 55.

Afternoon Session.

In the afternoon session,

Liquor Licenses.

Mr. Simpson moved the third reading of his Bill to diminish the number of licenses issued for the sale of intoxicating liquors, retail.
Messrs. Wilson, Aikins, McKellar, and Harcourt moved amendments, where were negatived, and the Bill passed.

Montreal Incorporation Acts

Mr. Dorion moved the third reading of his Bill to amend the incorporation acts of Montreal.

Mr. Rose moved several amendments which were negatived, and the Bill was passed.

Superannuation and Annuity Bill

Mr. Sherwood moved the third reading of his Pensioning Bill.

Mr. Drummond opposed the Bill. He said it would postpose for many years an object he had had in view, viz., a complete supervision of departmental service. He was in favour of making some provision for superannuated officers, but could not approve of the details of the Bill. At a time when the country was heavily burdened with debt, it was intended to take $210,000 out of the public chest to form a commencement for this fund, and that after the salaries and number of the employees had been increased to an enormous extent during the last few years. The whole departmental service required supervision. Eight years experience in the Government had taught him that the business of the department might be carried on with half the present number of employees. He moved to defer the consideration of the Bill till the first day of next session, to allow of a full enquiry into the salaries and capacities of the employees, and the possibility of diminishing the number before appropriating their money from the public chest.

Mr. Brown hoped that the House would adopt this resolution. If they gave $210,000, without any enquiry into the state of the public departments, it would be an act of improvidence scarcely equalled hitherto.

The amendment was negatived by 60 to 46.

Seignorial Tenure

On the question of receiving the report of the committee on Atty. Gen. Cartier’s Bill, relating to the final abolition of the feudal rights and duties,

Mr. Ferguson moved an amendment, providing, that whatever sum was necessary for the final abolition of the Seignorial rights and duties, should be paid from local funds in Lower Canada, or by the parties immediately interested, and not out of the consolidated revenues of the province. Negatived, 70 to 35.

Yeas – Messrs. Aikins, Bell, Biggar, Brown, Burwell, M. Cameron, Clark, Connor, Cook, Ferguson, Finlayson, Foley, Gould, Gowan, Harcourt, Mattice, A. P. McDonald, McDougall, McKellar, Mowat, Munro, Notman, Patrick, Walker, Powell, James Ross, Rymal, Wm. Scott, Short, Stirton, Wallbridge, White, Wilson, and Wright – 35.

Nays – Messrs. Abbot, Alleyn, Archambeault, Baby, Beaubien, Benjamin, Bourassa, Buchanan, Bureau, Burton, Cayley, Carson, Atty. General Cartier, Cauchon, Chapaid, Cimon, Duly, Daoust, Dawson, Desaulniers, Dionne, Dorion, Drummond, Dufresne, Dunkin, Foster, Fournier, Galt, Gaudet, Gill, Heath, Hebert, Jobin, Labelle, Laberge, Lacoste, Laframboise, Langevin, Laporte, Leboutillier, Lemieux, Loranger, Loux, Atty. General Macdonald, MacLeod, McCann, McMicken, Meagher, Sol. Gen. Morin, Morrison, Ouimet, Panet, Papineau, Piche, Playfair, Roblin, Rose, Dunbar, Ross, Sherwood, Sicotte, Simard, Simpson, Sincennes, Somerville, Tasse, Tett, Tailbaudeau, Turcotte, Webb, and Whitney – 70.

Supply

Mr. Galt moved the concurrence in the resolutions reported from the Committee of Supply.

Mr. Brown moved, in amendment, to strike out the item of $2,000 to Geroge Benjamin, Esq., a member of this House, for services rendered as a member of the Printing Committee of this House, such proposed vote being calculated to bring upon the House public contempt, and being opposed to the spirit, if not the lesser, of the Independence of Parliament Act, and a most dangerous precedent for future parliaments. He said he doubted whether any vote was ever proposed in this House fraught with so much evil as this vote to a member of the House. He did not disparage Mr. Benjamin’s services, but thought it exceedingly to be deplored that such a motion was introduced by the Government. If Mr. Benjamin was to be paid, why not pay the chairman of other committees, such as the Contingencies and Private Bills. In committee, Mr. Galt had placed the payment on ground which should deprive Mr. Benjamin of his seat. He had said that Mr. Benjamin was employed by the Government during the recess to supervise the Governmental as well as the Legislative Printing. This was clearly bringing him under the Independence of Parliamentary Act. If Mr. Benjamin had done ten times the work, it was an indignity to the House to propose to pay one of its members in this way.

Mr. Galt said the Printing Committee of last session recommended the payment of the chairman and his employment during the recess, but the report was introduced at so late a period that the vote of the House was not taken on it. Mr. Benjamin had devoted nine or ten months time, and ought to receive compensation. He said, there was a parallel case in the chairman of the committee of the whole House of Commons who received a salary.

Mr. Patrick said the resolution of the Printing Committee referred to was never adopted by the Committee. Mr. Simpson wrote it, and sent the Clerk to the members to obtain their sanction, but the majority repudiated it, and the report to the House was therefore withdrawn. He thought Mr. Simpson himself rendered more valuable services to the Printing Committee than Mr. Benjamin. Others had worked arduously without, like him, claiming their “pound of flesh.”

Mr. Sicotte in reply to the precedent cited by Mr. Galt, showed that the chairman of the committee of the House of Commons was selected by the House and paid a salary the same as the Speaker. He contented that there was no analogy in the present case.
Mr. Simpson said he was opposed to paying Mr. Benjamin for his services during the session, but he thought it right to pay for his services during the recess.

Mr. Dawson supported the payment.

Mr. Dunkin drew a distinction between paying a member for his services during the session and after. He thought it right in the latter case.
Mr. Gowan opposed the payment.

Mr. McDougall said that Mr. Dunking’s argument brought the case precisely within the mischief the Independence of the Parliament Act was intended to remedy, because Mr. Benjamin was paid for services rendered at the instance of Government.

Atty. Gen. MacDonald dwelt on the payment of the Chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means of the House of Commons as a precedent. He lauded Mr. Benjamin’s services and said the country should remunerate services rendered by a man not able to spare the time from the support of his family.

Mr. Mowat said the benefit of Mr. Benjamin’s services was greatly exaggerated and his payment directly contrary to the whole principle of the Independence of Parliament Act, which was, that for the interest of the country they should forego payment for their services as members of Parliament even when they could render those services with greater advantage than others.

Mr. Ferguson supported the amendment. If Mr. Benjamin;s services were so pre-eminently valuable he wondered why a place had not been found for him in the Cabinet.

Mr. Robinson supported the payment, and quoted the payment of Dr. Bowring’s services in China, in 1840, as a precedent.

Mr. Brown said the minutes of the Printing Committee showed that a resolution had been adopted to ask the House to address the Crown for a grant to Mr. Benjamin of $1,000; but, being found that it would interfere with his seat as a member of this House, this motion was withdrawn and a proposition was made to pay the amount out of the contingencies of the House, which was lost. He went on to say that it was remarkable that, among 37 clerks of the House having an average salary of $1,540, most of them not having more than three months’ work in the year, none was found competent to manage the printing during the recess. If Mr. Benjamin was the only competent man, they should dismiss a dozen clerks and appoint him permanently, after resigning his seat.

Mr. Malcolm Cameron supported the amendment, which was negatives – 52 to 50.

Yeas – Messrs. Aikins, Bell, Biggar, Bourassa, Brown, Bureau, Burwell, M. Cameron, Cimon, Clark, Connor, Cook, Dorion, Dorland, Ferguson, Finlayson, Foley, Gould, Gowan, Harcourt, Holmes, Howland, Jobin, Laframboise, Langevin, Lemieux, Loranger, Mattice, McDougall, McKellar, Mowat, Munro, Notman, Papineau, Patrick, Piche, W. Powell, D. Ross, J. Ross, Rymal, Wm. Scott, Short, Sicotte, Somerville, Stirton, Thibaudeau, Wallbridge, White, Wilson, and Wright, – 50.

Nays – Messrs. Abbott, Alleyn, Baby, Beaubien, Buchanan, Burton, Carling, Caron, Cartier, Chapais, Daly, Daoust, Dawson, Dionne, Dufresne, Duncan, Fortier, Fournier, Galt, Gaudet, Gill, Harwood, Hearth, Hebert, Labelle, Lacoste, Laporte, Loux, Macbeth, Atty. Gen. Macdonald, MacLeod, McCann, Meagher, Sol. Gen. Morin, Morrison, Ouimet, Panet, Playfair, Price, Robinson, Roblin, Rose, R. W. Scott, Sherwood, Simard, Simpson, Sincennes, Tasse, Tett, Turcotte, Webb, and Whitney, – 52.

Mr. Brown moved to strike out time 24, by which it was proposed to assume as a provincial obligation the debt of 680,000, incurred by the Montreal Harbour Commissioners for deepening Lake St. Peter for the benefit of the port of Montreal, and by which it was proposed to carry on said works in future at the expense of the province. He said that with the public dept already 70 millions, with a large deficit last year, and a prospect of heavy deficit for the present, this was not a time to assume this debt of the city of Montreal. Negatives – 63 to 43.

Yeas – Messrs. Aikins, Beaubien, Bell, Biggar, Brown, Burwell, M. Cameron, Chapais, Cimon, Clark, Connor, Cook, Dorland, Ferguson, Finlayson, Foley, Fortier, Gandet, Gould, Harcourt, Holmes, Howland, Langevin, Lemieux, A. P. McDonald, McDougall, McKellar, Mowat, Munro, Notman, Piche, Walker Powell, D. Ross, J. Ross, Rymal, W. Scott, SHort, Stirton, Thibaudeau, Wallbridge, White, Wilson, and Wright, – 43.

Nays. Messrs. Abbot, Alleyn, Archambeault, Baby, Benjamin, Bourassa, Buchanan, Bureau, Burton, Carling, Caron, Atty. Gen. Cartier, Cauchon, Daly, Daoust, Dawson, Desaulniers, Dionne, Dorion, Dufresne, Dunkin, Fournier, Galt, Gill, Gowan, Harwood, Heath, Hebert, Jobin, Labelle, Laberge, Lacoste, Laframboise, Laporte, Lornger, Loux, Macbeth, Attorney General Macdonald, MacLeod, McCann, McMicken, Meagher, Solicitor General Morin, Morrison, Ouimet, Panet, Papineau, Playfair, Price, Robinson, Roblin, Rose, R. W. Scott, Sherwood, Sicotte, Simard, Simpson, Sincennes, Tasse, Tett, Turcotte, Webb, and Whitney, – 63.

Mr. Brown said the House had now declared that they would assume this debt of $680,000, and they ought to follow it with a declaration that the [sic] not raised to provide for that debt should go into the public chest. There was no reason why the people of Western Canada, and the township should pay for what they did not use. He moved that the tonnage dues now paid to the Montreal Harbour commissioners to defray the expenditure of the works at Lake St. Peter, shall not be abolished as proposed, but on the a summption of the Montreal harbours trust debt by the Province, it shall continue to be paid as theretofore, and the proceeds paid over to the Receiver General.

Mr. Galt contented that the removal of the tolls would benefit the whole trade of Canada.

Mr. Cauchon opposed, and Mr. Cameron and Mr. White supported the amendment.

Negatived – 65 to 41. The changes from the previous division being Messrs. Mattice and Somerville, who votes yea; Messrs. Archambeault, Drummond, Laberge, Langevin, and Thibaudeau, who voted nay.

Mr. Malcolm Cameron said the canals from which the tolls were proposed to be removed cost $18,478,863, the interest on which was $1,110,873, and the repairs for 1860 being estimated at $580,809, the total cost this year was $1,690,782. For the sectional benefit for a particular part of the country it was proposed to throw this burden on the agriculturists of Upper Canada! He moved in amendment that the proposition of the Government to abolish all tolls on merchandize passing through the provincial canals by way of the St. Lawrence, and to retain them on merchandize destined to American ports, be not carried out.

Mr. McDougall supported the amendment, and point out that the proposition was a clear infraction of the terms of the Reciprocity Treaty.

Mr. Galt denied that it was an infraction of the Reciprocity Treaty.

Mr. Brown read a letter from the Secretary of the Montreal Harbour Commissioners, dated 13th May, 1859, addressed to the Provincial Secretary, stating that Mr. John Young had reported to the Board that arrangements had been made with the Government, by which the expense of that year’s operations on Lake St. Peter would be met independent of the Harbour Commissioners. Yet Mr. Galt had said that no such bargain had been made. It was clear that Mr. Galt, dreading an exposure of the transaction, brought forward the proposition to take off the whole canal tolls to cover this job.

Mr. Drummond opposed the amendment, which was negatived – 59 to 41.

Yeas. – Messrs. Aikins, Beaubien, Biggar, Brown, Burwell, M. Cameron, Chapais, Cimon, Clark, Connor, Cook, Dorland, Finlayson, Foley, Fortier, Gaudet, Gould, Harcourt, Holmes, Lemieux, Mattice, A. P. McDonald, McDougall, McKellar, Mowat, Munro, Notman, Piche, Walker Powell, D. Ross, James Ross, Rymal, William, Scott, Short, Somerville, Stirton, Thibaudeau, White, Wilson, and Wright. – 41.

Nays. – Messrs. Abbott, Alleyn, Baby, Benjamin, Bourassa, Buchanan, Bureau, Burton, Carling, Caron, Atty. Gen. Cartier, Cauchon, DAly, Dauost, Dawson, Desaulniers, Dionne, Drummond, Dufresne, Dunkin, Fournier, Galt, Gill, Heath, Hebert, Jobin, Labelle, Laberge, Lacoste, Laframboise, Langevin, Laporte, Loux, Macbeth, Atty. Gen. Macdonald, MacLeod, McCann, McMicken, Meagher, Sol. Gen. Morin, MOrrison, Ouimet, Panet, Playfair, Price, Robinson, Roblin, Rose, Richard Scott, Sherwood, Sicotte, Simard, Simpson, Sincennes, Tasse, Tett, Turcotte, Webb, And Whitney. — 59.

Mr. McDougall moved to strike out the item $18,000 for constructing certain local turnpike roads in Lower Canada, and that the said roads be constructed from the funds of the localities benefitted, like similar works in Upper Canada.

Mr. Brown supported the amendment, which was negatived 67 to 30.

Yeas. Messrs. Aikins, Brown, Burwell, M. Cameron, Clark, Connor, Cook, Dorland, Finlayson, Foley, Gould, Harcourt, Holmes, Mattice, A. P. McDonald, McDougall, McKellar, Mowat, Munro, Notman, Walker Powell, James Ross, Rymal, William, Scott, Short, Stirton, Wallbridge, White, Wilson, and Wright. – 30.

Nays. – Messrs. Abbot, Alleyn, Baby, Beaubien, Benjamin, Bourassa, Buchanan, Bureau, carling, Caron, Attorney General Cartier, Cauchon, Chapais, Cimon, Daly, Daoust, Dawson, Dessaulniers, Dionne, Dorion, Drummond, Dufresne, Dunkin, Fortier, Fournier, Galt, gaudet, Gill, Heath, Hebert, Jobin, Labelle, Laberge, Lacoste, Laframboise, Langevin, Laporte, Lemieux, Loux, Macbeth, Atty. Gen. Macdonald, MacLeod, McCann, McMicken, Meagher, Sol. Gen. Morin, Morrison, Ouimet, Panet, Piche, Playfair, Price, Robinson, Roblin, Rose, D. Ross, R. W. Scott, Sherwood, Sicotte, Simard, Simpson, Sincennes, Tasse, Thibaudeau, Turcotte, Webb, and Whitney. – 67.

Mr. Piche moved an amendment to facilitate the settlement of public lands, and stop the emigration from the province. Negatived 66 to 33.
The report of the committee was adopted. To be received to-morrow.

Mr. Galt moved the House again into Committee of Supply.

Mr. Brown moved an amendment that in view of the unsatisfactory state of the laws of debtor and creditor in regard to commercial matters in Upper Canada, and the commercial embarrassment which has unhappily prevailed in that section, the House deeply regrets that the anticipations on the subject, excited by His Excellency’s speech from the throne at the opening of the session, have not been realized, and the attention of Parliament was invited to a Government measure protecting creditors from the frauds of debtors, and securing the distribution of insolvent estates; enabling honest debtors on surrendering their property, and providing their losses to be the result of misfortune, to be discharged from their obligations.

Negatived 62 to 26.

Yeas. – Messrs. Aikins, Brown, Burwell, Clark, Connor, Dorland, Foley, Gould, Harcourt, Howland, Laberge, A. P. McDonald, McDougall, McKellar, Mowat, Munro, Notman, Walker Powell, J. Ross, Rymal, William Scott, Short, Stirton, Wallbridge, White, and Wilson. – 26.
Nays. – Messrs. Abbot, Alleyn, Archambeault, Baby, Beaubien, Benjamin, Bourassa, Buchanan, Bureau, Burton, Carling, Caron, Attorney General Cartier, Cauchon, Chapais, Cimon, Dauost, Dawson, Dessulniers, Dionne, Dorion, Durfresne, Dunkin, Fortier, Fournier, Galt, Gaudet, Harwood, Heath, Labelle, Lacoste, Laframboise, Langevin, Laporte, Lemieux, Loranger, Loux, Macbeth, Atty. Gen. Macdonald, MacLeod, Mattice, McCann, Meagher, Sol. Gen. Morin, Ouimet, Panet, Papineau, Playfair, Price, Roblin, R. W. Scott, Sherwood, Sicotte, Simard, Thibaudeau, Turcotte, Webb, and Whitney. – 62.

The House then went into Committee of Supply and passed the remaining items.

Atty. Gen. Macdonald moved the House into committee on the Upper Canada School Bill.

Mr. Brown moved the three months’ hoist, and protested against the measure being forced through when the Upper Canada members, by a majority of nine, declared they did not want it.

Mr. Roblin supported the Bill.

The amendment was negatived 49 to 26. The Upper Canada vote against the Bill was 25 to 18.

The Bill was ordered to a third reading tomorrow.

The House adjourned at 1.15.

Quebec, May 16.

The House met at eleven o’clock.

SUPPLY

Mr. Galt moved the concurrence in the report of the Committee of Supply.

Mr. Rose explained the Baby tug boat transaction. He said the contract was found unprofitable to the province, very few vessels being towed. But a new class of services had arisen for vessels which might be accomplished by Mr. Baby’s boats. He claimed that the terms on which the contracts was cancelled were most favourable. Three of the vessels were as good as when they were launched. The whole cost of the vessels to the province was $225,544, including $72,000 of an old advance by the province on the security of the boats. They had cost Mr. Baby £96,000. He thought there would be little loss if any to the province if the vessels were sold, because they gave £40,000 less than the cost price. Certain services must be performed by some means or others. The province was bound to pay Mr. Baby till 1864, yearly, thirty per cent., and and for towage and mail service to Pictou, Trinity House service, supplies for lighthouses, quarantine service and fisheries, – making altogether $95,200. The Government did not intend going into the towing service, and had directed the vessels to be sold in October next, to give time for tenders to be received from the United States, Lower Provinces, and Europe. The estimated cost of the provisions and repairs for the present season was $40,000. They would not insure the steamers. One steamer had been already despatched to the lighthouse stores; another was laying down buoys; the third was to run to Pictou once a fortnight.

Mr. Brown asked would the Government take freight and passengers?

Mr. Rose – Undoubtedly; that arrangement was, however, only for this season.

Mr. Brown – Is the towing to be stopped?

Mr. Rose said the Government did not intend towing, but would send vessels unemployed to the assistance of wrecks.

Mr. Brown said he would call the attention of the House to the salient points of the transaction. First, Mr. Rose said the Government had no intention of running these boats on their own account. He was happy that they had come to that conclusion, though somewhat late in the day. He quoted the Department of Works report that Government thought it an advantageous arrangement to employ themselves the contractor’s vessels. There was not a word then about the sale of the vessels. Mr. Rose had told the House that the vessels cost £96,000. He might as well have said £960,000. Certainly the Government had paid far more than the value of the vessels, which were unfit for any service except that for which they were built. Mr. Baby’s original contract was a monstrous abuse, concluded without the sanction of Parliament. It was desirable to rescind it, but the Government had no right to buy boats and involve the province worse than ever. Mr. Rose had declared that he would run the boats this year for $40,000. He would believe that when the session was closed and the accounts in. Of course the Commissioner contended that accidents were impossible and repairs unnecessary. He confessed that he expected to hear Mr. Rose, a year hence, deeply regretting that unforeseen circumstances had caused a large loss from the speculation. The boats were not insured, and the risk ws equivalent to $25,000; the interest on the purchase money was $15,000; tear and wear, 10 per cent., $22,000, and the total expense of the season’s service would be upwards of $100,000. What the Government should have done was to close the contract, allowing Mr. Baby to sell his boats to pay his debts, but should not have assumed the proprietorship themselves for a single hour. He believed that the sale was postponed till October, to see how the business gets along, and then to judge whether to sell the boats or continue in the trade. He moved, in amendment, that the House disapproves of the Government purchasing five steamers from Mr. Baby, at a cost of $225,544, and views with regret the alarm the declared intention of the Government to run the said boats on the part of the Government at the expense of the province.

Mr. Sicotte said Mr. Allan, of the Ocean Steamship Line, had told him that Mr. Baby’s steamers were of no value. He had ascertained from the builder that they were not available for commercial purposes. They were only worth the price of old iron, except the Lady Head. While Commissioner of Works, he (Mr. Sicotte) often urged the Government to relieve Mr. Baby, of his contract, and never agreed to any proposal except to purchase the only boat declared to be available. For the Government to run boats cheaper than private competitors was an impossibility. The Government should have insisted on Mr. Baby fulfilling his contract. The House should set its face against the contractors of the Government being relieved from their obligations.

Mr. Cauchon approved of the whole transaction.

The amendment was negatived by 63 to 39.

Yeas. – Messrs. Aikins, Bell, Bourassa, Brown, Burwell, M. Cameron, Clark, Connor, Cook, Dorion, Dorland, Finlayson, Gould, Harcourt, Howland, Laberge, Laframboise, Loranger, Mattice, A. P. McDonald, McDougall, McGee, McKellar, Mowat, Munro, Notman, Patrick, Walker Powell, J. Ross, Rymal, Wm. Scott, Short, Sicotte, Somerville, Wallbridge, White, Wilson, and Wright– 39.

Nays. – Messrs. Abbott, Alleyn, Archambeault, Baby, Beaubien, Benjamin, Buchanan, Burton, J. Cameron, Carling, Caron, Atty. Gen. Cartier, Cauchon, Chapais, Cimon, Daly, Daoust, Dionne, Drummond, Dufresne, Dunkin, Fortier, Fournier, Galt, Gaudet, Gill, Harwood, Heath, Holmes, Labelle, Lacoste, Langevin, Laporte, Lemieux, Loux, Macbeth, Atty. Gen. Macdonald, MacLeod, McCann, Meagher, Sol. Gen. Morin, Morrison, Ouimet, Panet, Playfair, Pope, W. F. Powell, Price, Robinson, Roblin, Rose, D. Ross, R. W. Scott, Sherwood, Simard, Simpson, Sincennes, Tasse, Tett, Thibaudeau, Turcotte, Webb, and Whitney – 63.

The House then went into Committee of Ways and Means, and gave authority to the Government to raise a loan of a million of dollars for the expenditures of the year. The Supply Bill was introduced.

AFTERNOON SITTING

Mr. Galt moved the second reading of the Supply Bill.

Mr. Brown said there were two points to which he had not previously an opportunity of directing attention. The first was the deficit of last year. Mr. Galt alleged that it was $451,000. This result was obtained by a pure juggle. He left out of the amount the Seignioral indemnity, $136,000; the entire expenditure on unproductive Public Works, $319,000; the grant to the Montreal Harbour Trust, $60,000; Baby’s boats, $60,000 – all expenditures of last year. THe actual expenses of the removal of the Government, $108,000, he actually proposed to spread over four years, charging for 1859 only $26,000. He was astonished that Mr. Galt should attempt such a palpable juggle. Again he actually put down as revenue $221,000, which he received as premiums on the sale of debentures. The value of the Provincial credit was five per cent., and instead of issuing fives he issues sixes at thirteen or fourteen per cent. premium. The money thus got he counted as revenue! By issuing seven per cents. he might have got $440,000, or eight per cent., $660,000. He might, in fact, have had any amount of revenue he liked, provided he made the interest large enough. (Laughter.) The thing was an utter fallacy. The real deficit of last year was $1,350,000, which Mr. Galt met with borrowed money. The second point was, that last night the House were induced to assume the Montreal Harbour debt of $680,000, and sweep away the canal tolls yielding a revenue of $2,000,000. This was in face of the fact that Mr. Galt’s estimates of this year showed a deficit of two millions, and he apprehended that when they met next session it would be seen that this was much under the fact. Estimates always were so. Last year the expenditures exceeded Mr. Galt’s estimate $700,000, and the receipts fell short a million. He went astray nearly two millions. Possibly a similar result would take place this year. In defiance of this the House yesterday assumed large new liabilities, and abolished sources of revenue. Mr. Brown also referred to the new system of including in the general revenues the income derived from special funds, and expressed his disapproval.

Mr. Galt said the spreading the expenses of the removal of the Seat of Government over four years was recommended by the Audit Board, but disapproved of by the Public Accounts Committee. The premium of $210,000 was treated in the same way for the last twenty years.

Mr. Brown said it was a wrong practice.

The Bill was read a second time.

On the question of the third reading.

Mr. Dawson took the opportunity of making some remarks, urging the improvements of the St. Maurice district.

The Bill was then passed.

Mr. Brown called attention to the Hampton papers. It would be recollected that he alleged that the Govenor General, when in England, offered to Dr. Hampton the chairmanship of the Board of Prison Inspectors. The Attorney General West promised to support the proposition in the Executive Council. Dr. Hampton, on the strength of those promises, came to Canada, and was kept waiting several months, being told that the appointment must be delayed till after the general election, least Dr. Nelson, being offended, should cause the Government to lose two seats at the Montreal election. The appointment was finally conferred on Dr. Nelson, and an inspectorship was offered to Dr. Hampton, which he declined. The House would remember that Mr. Cartier contradicted that statement. The papers brought down fully bore out his statement, though two highly important letters, one from Dr. Hampton to the Attorney General West, and the Attorney General’s reply, had been withheld. Mr. Brown proceeded to read the correspondence containing statements of what had taken place; communications between the Governor and the Attorney General West; he read Atty. Gen. Macdonald’s letters, addressing Dr. Hampton in a friendly manner, and not contradicting a single allegation of Dr. Hampton. He enumerated the dates of the various letters of the Governor General withheld, and asked what reliance could be placed on the returns of the Government when such correspondence was thus unfairly selected. He commented on the fact that Dr. Hampton was selected as the most proper man to fill the position, but was finally refused the office because the Government feared offending a partisan whose influence, if used at the Montreal Election, might lose them two seats. It was altogether a very discreditable transaction, and he hoped Mr. Cartier would withdraw the contradiction which he gave to his (Mr. Brown’s) statement on a former occasion.

Att. Gen. Macdonald stated the circumstances of the case. He admitted that the Governor General had suggested Dr. Hampton his appointment as Prison Inspector, and he (Mr. Macdonald) had promised to support the application; but he said the chairmanship was not specially promised. He said he had committed a mistake as to Dr. Hampton. He found that he was no gentleman, having placed on record private conversations in letters placed in Mr. Brown’s hands.

[The Attorney General totally omitted to advert to Dr. Nelson and the Montreal Election.]

Mr. Brown said that Mr. Macdonald had made the case worse by attempting to malign the character of Dr. Hampton. He had testimonials signed by the most eminent names in England. He was selected by the Governor General and Mr. Macdonald himself as a most competent man for the chairmanship of the prison inspectors. The letters were not placed in his hands by Dr. Hampton, but by a gentleman with whom Dr. Hampton left them, to be used if necessary. He proceeded to read the correspondence of the Governor General with Dr. Hampton, in which His Excellency admitted the whole case. Why were not those letters brought down?

Mr. Alleyn said that ministers had no control over letters written by the Governor General, and were not bound by them.

Mr. Brown said the Government were responsible for every despatch and official letter of the Governor General. The correspondence demonstrated that the Government abused the patronage of the Crown with the view of affecting elections. They appointed Dr. Nelson to the chairmanship because he exercised such political influence that the Government dared not risk driving him into opposition. The gentleman rejected had far higher qualifications. He moved that the papers be printed, which was carried.

THE SCHOOL BILL

Atty. Gen. Macdonald moved the third reading of the School Bill.

Mr. Malcolm Cameron moved to post-pone it to the first day of next session it was negatived 55 to 34.

Yeas – Messrs. Aikins, Bell, Bourassa, Brown, Burwell, M. Cameron, Clark, Connor, Cook, Dorion, Dorland, Finlayson, Foley, Gould, Harcourt, Howland, Laframboise, D. A. McDonald, Mattice, A. P. McDonald, McDougall, McGee, McKellar, Mowat, Munro, Notman, Patrick, J. Ross, Short, Somerville, Stirton, Wallbridge, White, and Wright, – 34.

Nays – Messrs. Abbot, Alleyn, Archambeault, Baby, Beaubien, Benjamin, Buchanan, Burton, J. Cameron, Carlin, Attorney General Cartier, Cauchon, Chapais, Cimon, Daly, Daoust, Dawson, Dionne, Dufresne, Dunkin, Fournier, Galt, Faudet, Harwood, Heath, Labelle, Lacoste, Langevin, Laporte, Loux, Macbeth, Attorney General Macdonald, MacLeod, McCann, McMicken, Meagher, Sol. Gen. Morin, Morrison, Ouimet, Panet, Playfair, Pope, Wm. Powell, Price, Robinson, Roblin, Rose, R. Scott, Sherwood, Sicotte, Simpson, Sincennes, Tasse, Turcotte, and Whitney, – 55.

Mr. Brown said is all three divisions on this Bill there was an Upper Canada majority against it, yet Lower Canada members forced it on them.

The Bill was then finally passes.

Cartier Shaking

A long discussion took place on Attorney General Cartier’s Registry Bill for Lower Canada. Atty. Gen. Cartier attacked Mr. Loranger, who vigorously replied and said Atty. Gen. Cartier’s vehemence was because he felt the ground shaking under his feet. The Bill is to be reported on Friday.

Address to the Prince

Atty. Gen. Cartier moved, seconded by Mr. Brown, that an Address on the auspicious occasion of the visit of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, be presented, expressing gratification at the visit.

The resolution was carried by acclamation, the Attorney General Macdonald, Mr. Galt, Mr. Brown, Mr. Dorion, and Attorney General Cartier, appointed a committee to frame the Address.

Protection of Growing Timber

Mr. Sherwood moved the House into committee on the Bill for the protection of growing timber.

Mr. Playfair moved the three months’ hoist.

Mr. M. Cameron supported the Bill.

Mr. McKellar opposed it; he said it was to give protection to absentees who owned four million of acres in Upper Canada, prejudicially to the best interest of the country.

Messrs. Roblin, John Cameron, and Robinson, supported the Bill.

Mr. Sherwood defended the Bill, and said if a man cut down a tree on his property, and made a cord of firewood,, he was guilty of stealing, and could be convicted of larceny. A person going on another’s lot to take away timber sufficient to make 20 cords, should also be declared guilty of larceny, and not merely a trespasser.

Mr. McDougall supported the principle of the Bill, but thought the penalties too severe.

Mr. Gould opposed the Bill. The amendment was negatived 46 to 30.

In committee the penalty was changed from two years imprisonment to six months. – To be reported on Friday.

Third Readings

Mr. Rose’s Bill for Insurance Companies not incorporated within the province, was finally passed. Also Mr. Gould’s, enabling County Councils to allow travelling expenses to members.

Homestead Exemption.

The House went into Committee on the Homestead Bill.

Mr. WM. Powell moved that the committee rise, killing the Bill. Yeas 34; nays 27.

Atty. Gen. Cartier voted against the Bill; Attorney General Macdonald did not vote.

Corrupt Practices at Elections

On the question of the reception of the report of the Committee of the Whole on Corrupt Practices at Elections’ Bill.

Mr. Ouimet moved the three months hoist.

Atty. Gen. Macdonald suggested that Mr. McDougall expunge the clause requiring a declaration from the members that they had not been guilty of corrupt practices.

Mr. McDougall declined.

Mr. Sicotte said Mr. Macdonald took a strange course in proposing to destroy the Bill because he objected to one clause.

The amendment was negatived by 40 to 34.

Yeas. – Messrs. Alleyn, Benjamin, Burton, Atty. Gen. Cartier, Cauchon, Chapais, Cimon, Coutlee, Daoust, Dawson, Dionne, Dufresne, Dunkin, Fournier, Galt, Gill, Harwood, Heath, Laporte, Macbeth, Atty. Gen. Macdonald, A. P. McDonald, Meagher, Ouimet, Pope, W. F. Powell, Price, Robinson, Roblin, R. W. Scott, Sherwood, Simpson, Tasse, and Webb – 34.

Nays. – Messrs. Aikins, Bell, Bourassa, Brown, Burwell, J. Cameron, M. Cameron, Clark, Connor, Dorion, Finlayson, Foley, Gaudet, Gould, Harcourt, Howland, Langevin, Lemieux, Loranger, Loux, D. A. Macdonald, Mattice, McCann, McDougall, McGee, McKellar, Mowat, Munro, Notman, Panet, W. Powell, D. Ross, J. Ross, Rymal, Short, Sicotte, Stirton, Thibaudeau, Turcotte, Wallbridge, White, and Wright — 40.

The bill was read a third time and passed amidst Opposition cheers.

Representation by Population.

The next item was the adjourned debate on Mr. Wallbridge’s resolution on Representation by Population.

Mr. Richard Scott moved an amendment to take item 44 – the Upper Canada Sectarian School Bill.

Mr. Brown protested against this scheme of getting rid of the question of Representation by Population, by appealing to the prejudiced of Lower Canadians on the Sectarian School question. The country would understand the trick by which the Government evaded the question.

Mr. Scott denied that he had acted in concert with the Administration.

Mr. Scott’s motion was carried – 42 to 39.

Mr. J. Cameron moved that the House adjourn.

Mr. McGee expressed surprise at Mr. Scott’s course. He said Mr. Scott had informed him that he would not pass the Bill this session. After consulting with the Government, who advised him to wait till Mr. Ferguson’s Bill abolishing separate schools was vote down, and then when Mr. Scott proposed moving his Bill in addition to the Attorney General’s School Bill, they opposed him.

Atty. Gen. Macdonald submitted intimating to Mr. Scoot that he would oppose the additions of his clauses to the Government Bill, although he would support it as a distinct measure.

Mr. Brown asked if Atty. Gen. Macdonald advised Mr. Scott to delay the Bill till Mr. Ferguson’s was voted down.

Atty. Gen. Macdonald said he had no recollection of it.

Mr. Scott said Atty. Gen. Macdonald gave him that advice on day en passant.

The adjournment was carried – 41 to 39. The members of the Government voted yea, after seeing the motion was likely to be carried.

The House adjourned at 12 o’clock.