Document Information
Date: 1864-03-14
By: Province of Canada (Parliament)
Citation: Province of Canada, Parliament, Scrapbook Debates, 8th Parl, 2nd Sess, 1864 at 84-85.
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
MONDAY, March 14th, 1864
Adjournment
James Currie [Niagara, elected 1862] moved
That when the House adjourns on Friday next, the 18th inst., it do stand adjourned until Thursday, the 7th day of April next, as such adjournment would not retard the progress of the public business before the House.
In support of his motion the hon. member said he believed that the Government were disposed to acquiesce in it, and that the other Branch of the Legislature would favor a similar adjournment. But even if they did not conclude to do so for quite so long a period, and this House met a few days after they had resumed business, it would be an easy matter to overtake them, for with the satisfactory manner in which things were done here the back work, if there were any, could be disposed of in a few days. He was not, however, so wedded to the motion as to refuse to modify it somewhat if the majority of the members thought it wise to do so. Meanwhile, he would submit the motion.
A.J. Fergusson Blair [Brock, elected 1860, Provincial Secretary] said that the practice of such adjournments had now prevailed for some time. He remembered when they only extended to a week, but the convenience of the Legislature had, for some years past, been consulted in the matter and its desire respected. With regard to the Government he might say that they would prefer that there should be no long adjournment, and that they were quite prepared to go on with their measures. This would save time and bring the business of Parliament to an earlier conclusion, but if there were a strong desire on the part of hon. members to have a more protracted period for absence, the Government would not stand in the way. It was, no doubt, important to some Upper Canada members that they should be able to go and look after their affairs just at present, but to those who stayed behind the time would be very disagreeable. On the whole, he must say he thought three weeks too long an adjournment, and he would suggest that the motion be amended by making it from Friday next to the Tuesday after Easter. In this way only three actual working days would be sacrificed instead of eleven.
Alexander Campbell [Cataraqui, elected 1858 said he fully concurred in the views of the Hon. Provincial Secretary [A.J. Fergusson Blair]. He must, however, say he found it somewhat difficult to reconcile his statement with the views expressed in this House by an hon. member—he referred to the present Minister of Finance [Luther Holton]—had said that the adjournment was in the hands of the Government, and that they should themselves decide whether or not it was to take place.
A.J. Fergusson Blair [Brock, elected 1860, Provincial Secretary]—Well, that hon. gentleman was of a different opinion now.
Some Hon. Members—Laughter from both sides.
Alexander Campbell [Cataraqui, elected 1858—[illegible] all was serene now. He was glad to hear it. Well, he would certainly recommend the House to adopt the suggestion of the Hon. Provincial Secretary [A.J. Fergusson Blair] as it would only occasion the loss of three working days. The proposal would allow the members from the West to reach their homes on Saturday evening, for they could leave on Thursday afternoon in time for the evening train, and could be back at the latest for Wednesday’s sitting. The Opposition desired no adjournment. They had come to Parliament for the purpose of attending to the public business, and were disposed to apply themselves to it to the best of their ability.
David Christie [Erie, elected 1858] said the proposition of the Hon. Provincial Secretary [A.J. Fergusson Blair] would hardly suit the members who resided West of Toronto. If the House met on Friday it was their duty to be present. He thought it would be better to adjourn on Thursday, for under any circumstances, as it was St. Patrick’s Day, there would be but little business done, and then the adjournment should at least go over until the Thursday of the second week.
Luc Letellier de Saint Just [Grandville, elected 1860, Minister of Agriculture] begged to remark that when the Hon. Mr. Holton had said what had been stated, the circumstances were quite different. He [Mr. Le Tellier] approved of the suggestion of the hon. member [Mr. Christie] to extend the time to Thursday.
Walter McCrea [Western, elected 1862] said it had not been the custom of the Legislature to adjourn before the Easter week itself, and he thought the practice was a good one. For his part he would prefer sticking to the good old custom, and then if necessary the adjournment might be prolonged one week after the Easter week.
John Ross [Canada West, appointed 1848] said that if the Government were prepared to oppose the adjournment a together he would vote with them; and if, as the Hon. Provincial Secretary [A.J. Fergusson Blair] had stated, they were ready to go on with their measures, they ought to go on and carry them through if possible. But if they did not intend to oppose the motion he thought the suggestion of the hon. member for Erie (Hon. Mr. Christie) should be adopted, viz., to adjourn on Thursday next until Thursday the 31st inst., or for two weeks, instead of the three proposed in the motion. By adjourning on Thursday the members from the far West would be enabled to reach their homes on Saturday, whereas, by adjourning on Friday, they would be delayed on Sunday in Toronto. As to the readiness of the Government to go on with their measures he [Mr. Ross] had only seen two Bills, prepared by a former member of the Government [Hon. Mr. Abbott] which had been introduced by [illegible] sent Solicitor General for Lower Canada [illegible] one other Bill, introduced by the Premier [illegible] Bill to amend the Registration Laws of Upper Canada; and this Bill had been prepared by a committee of Registrars before the Cartier Macdonald Ministry had resigned. He had not seen any other Government measures laid before Parliament this session, but if they had their other measures ready they ought to oppose the adjournment and go on.
Philip Moore [Canada East, appointed 1841] asked whether it was intended to adjourn on Thursday of this week of the next?
Several Members—Of this week.
Philip Moore [Canada East, appointed 1841]—If there was to be any adjournment at all, it should be long enough to accommodate the members from the most distant constituencies. But he [Mr. Moore] thought it was not courteous to decide the question in advance of the other Branch.
Some Hon. Members—Oh! Oh!
Philip Moore [Canada East, appointed 1841]—Well, he thought it was not proper that this House should rise and leave the other Branch sitting. They might have some matter in hand concerning which they wished to communicate with this House.
John Ross [Canada West, appointed 1848]—Why two or three years ago they adjourned, and left this House sitting.
Philip Moore [Canada East, appointed 1841]—Well, the responsibility rested with them. They left this House sitting and it could do very little. He was happy to find his hon. friend from Cataraqui [Hon. Mr. Campbell] so ready to co-operate with the Government, and trusted that he, as leader of the Opposition, would always manifest the same impartial spirit. He hoped to see him supporting any good measure brought up, and never exhibiting anything like a factious spirit, but that when he opposed any measure it would be because he thought it bad. In his opinion this House should not adjourn for a longer time than the other.
James Aikins [Home, elected 1862]—There was no danger about the other House not adjourning. A round robin had been signed by a large number of members on both sides recommending an adjournment until the 7th April, as proposed in the motion now before the House, and it would look somewhat singular if this House should be in session one week before them. He too was anxious to proceed with the public business, but he did not see it would be advanced by meeting when the other Branch was not sitting.
James Currie [Niagara, elected 1862] said that, with the view of pleasing every body—
Some Hon. Members—A laugh.
James Currie [Niagara, elected 1862]—he would modify his motion by proposing that the House should adjourn on Thursday, the 17th, until Thursday, the 31st of this month.
The motion, in its amended form, was then put and carried.