June 8, 1904


House in committee on Bill (No. 89) to incorporate the Cedar Rapids Manufacturing and Power Company.-Mr. Guthrie.


LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of Inland Revenue)

Liberal

Mr. BRODKUR.

I understand that the promoters are not anxious to go on with the Bill, and move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Progress reported.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Sub-subtopic:   CEDAR RAPIDS MANUFACTURING AND POWER COMPANY.
Permalink

OTTAWA RIVER RAILWAY COMPANY.


House in committee on Bill (No. 78) respecting the Ottawa River Railway Company.-Mr. Ethier. On section 4, Section 13 of the said Act is repealed.


LIB

Thomas Christie

Liberal

Mr. CHRISTIE.

I move that this section be struck out.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   OTTAWA RIVER RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Joseph Arthur Calixte √Čthier

Liberal

Mr. ETHIER.

As I am promoting the Bill I think it but right that I should furnish some explanation concerning the motion of the hon. member for Argenteuil (Mr. Christie). Last year this House granted a charter to the Ottawa River Railway Company. In that Bill, which was sanctioned on the 24th of Qctober, there was an unusual -I might say an extraordinary-clause. That is the section 13, which this Bill proposes to repeal, and which reads as follows :

The company shall deposit with the government. within six months from the passing of this Act, plans of the main line between Grenville and Montreal, and on the approval of such plans shall deposit with the government the sum of $25,000 as a guaranty for the construction of the line.

Within six months from the 24th of October the company had the surveys from Montreal to Grenville made and the plans deposited in the hands of the Railway Commission, and these were approved on the 25th of May -last. In the meantime the company obtained legislation from the legislative assembly at Toronto for a charter from Hawkesbury to Georgian bay. Now it is la;pplying to complete its system from Hawkesbury to Ottawa, and is asking thaL this condition requiring a deposit of $25,000 should be withdrawn. The Railway Committee decided in favour of withdrawing it, but at the instance of the hon. member for Argenteuil, we are disposed, in order to show our good faith and sincerity, to have the section amended in this way :

That section 13 of the said Act is amended by striking out the words ' within six months of the passing of this Act ' on line two thereof, and substituting therefor the words ' on or before the 1st of October, 1904.'

If my hon. friend will withdraw his motion, I would propose that section 4 of the Bill be struck out and that in its place be substituted the clause I have just read.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   OTTAWA RIVER RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Peter Macdonald (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.

Does the hon. member for Argenteuil withdraw bis motion ?

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   OTTAWA RIVER RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Christie

Liberal

Mr. CHRISTIE.

Yes.

Amendment (Mr. Ethier) agreed to.

Bill, as amended, reported, read the third time and passed.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   OTTAWA RIVER RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

SPRAGUE'S FALLS MANUFACTURING COMPANY.


On the order. Resuming adjourned debate on the proposed motion of Mr. Henderson for the third reading of Bill (No. 42) respecting the Sprague's Falls Manufacturing Company, Limited. .


LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of Inland Revenue)

Liberal

Hon. L. P. BRODEUR (Minister of Inland Revenue).

I ask that this Bill be allowed to stand in the absence of the Minister of Labour (Sir Wm. Muloek). That hon. gentleman intended to look into this Bill, and I do not know whether he has had an opportunity to do so or not. I' would ask that the Bill be allowed to stand until his return.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   SPRAGUE'S FALLS MANUFACTURING COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

David Henderson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HENDERSON.

I have no desire to press the Bill. I only moved the third reading in the absence of the promoter (Mr. Ganong). I suppose it will come up again on Friday evening.

Order allowed to stand.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   SPRAGUE'S FALLS MANUFACTURING COMPANY.
Permalink

SECOND READINGS.


Bill (No. 126) respecting certain patents of Siegfried Gironcoli.-Mr. MacKinnon. Bill (No. 129) respecting certain patents of Edwin R. Cahoone.-Mr. German.


WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.


House resumed debate on the proposed motion of Mr. Fielding: That the Speaker do now leave the chair, for the House to go into committee to consider of the ways and means for raising the supply to be presented to His Majesty.


CON

Rufus Henry Pope

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. RUFUS H. POPE (Compton).

Mr. Speaker, before we went to dinner, I had had a half hour's pleasant occupation in discussing matters connected with the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir Richard Cartwright) and something of his record in relation to the public affairs of Canada. I am not disappointed that that right hon. gentleman has not returned this evening. I can excuse him owing to the condition of his health, and I believe it is not altogether too pleasant for the gallant knight to listen to the truths set down in his own record. We had discovered, during our discussion this afternoon, a certain page of Canadian history which may be called the Cartwright page ; and on that page are engraved the names of many Cartwrights, who are being paid for their services-good or bad-to this country at the rate of about $20,000 a year, I take it for granted that these gentlemen have been occupying for the last seven or eight years the positions they now occupy. For I know that the gallant knight is of charitable, friendly, family-loving disposition and would not allow any children who bear his name to he out in

the cold a moment longer than is necessary. And so, we find that the occupancy of these positions by these gentlemen has cost the public about $160,000. And what do we get for all that, besides the odd services that may be rendered by these gentlemen, tlje foundation of whose influence in securing the position that they occupy is the name they bear. It is that the right hon. gentleman (Sir Richard Cartwright) delivers us a speech once a year-and the same old speech. It seems to me that this is a little hard even for a speech from such a great authority as the gallant knight from South Oxford is estimated to be by the hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House. We also this afternoon spent a few moments in reading a letter which he had written to the late Sir John A. Macdonald in days gone by, telling the great statesman that it would be impossible for him to occupy a position in the government or support him further if Sir Francis Hincks were taken into the administration and made Finance Minister. In those days the people would have expected the right hon. gentleman to act upon a higher plane than the mere consideration of salary. However, he saw fit to stamp his record, even in those early days, with the principle that ue could not belong to a party in which he was'not permitted to dictate his occupancy of the position to the Finance Minister or member of the cabinet, and so he left his former party. He had not then an opportunity to show his great ability as Finance Minister. But that opportunity came to him later on, and certainly his record as Finance Minister of Canada is not one that he can be very proud of, especially when he looks at the diagram to which I took occasion to refer this afternoon. In that diagram appears the great monument, the high tower, of dismal failure in Canada which was the production of his genius as Finance Minister.

Then it can be said that he has twice as high a tower as any one else in the financial world has1 ever been able to build when dabbling with the finances of Canada. I do not know that there would be any better place for the hon. member who at other times has offered us free epitaphs to have his written than on the top of that very tower which he. through his financial genius, has constructed as part of the financial history of this country. I also referred to that lonely march of that hon. gentleman through Ontario previous to 1896, which the Prime Minister will remember. I have no doubt that the heart of the Prime Minister who was known to be a sympathetic man went out on many occasions when he thought of his old colleague wandering about in his native province- from place to place when nobody even would have him speak. I understand that history is repeating itself and that now he is wandering around for a constituency.

I also gave the Prime Minister's testimony as to the great suffering of the right hon. gentleman during the eighteen years that he occupied that position of smothering his true feelings for the benefit of a hypocritical party. It is a sad sight indeed to think of a man, such a lion as he represented himself to be in his wanderings through Ontario, a lion of force and energy, of honesty, economy, and of purity and all those elements that should make a man attractive in this country. Suffering in that way, it was hard to feel that after eighteen long long, long years he was pent up and had to act that double life which I am sure a man of his stern integrity would feel to be irksome. We can forgive him, I and older men on this side of the House, can forgive him for those vindictive adjectives which he used to hurl against us. It was his only relief, his only possibility of remaining alive ; his very existence depended on his having some ventilation, and he used to pour it out on us, volume after volume for eighteen years. Now that his party is in power he is wandering in search of a constituency and is only utilized in this House once a year to repeat a speech that has been repeated so often that it has become buffoonery and serves only for amusement for the man who utters it. It is a sad come down and is poor encouragement for younger men to enter public life, to suffer eighteen years, to be true and faithful and struggle on, under that terrible load of suffering and at the end of that time to have no constituency and be a poor old man like a wanderer going from door to door no one willing to have him. I do not suppose that any man could be more humbled or humiliated than the gallant knight of South Oxford, when he was not offered that position which he said he was going to have, the position of Finance Minister, which his leader had said he should have. When they went away down by the sea and picked out that secessionist and made him Finance Minister, it must have been an unkind cut to the man who thought he had always been loyal. The gallant knight stated when we thought of establishing the Department of Trade and Commerce that it was absolutely useless, that it was the fifth wheel to a coach and of no possible utility. In order to humble him that was the place selected for him by his colleagues. Of all political histories, taking his record as found in resolutions in the 1 Hansard ' of Canada, one way one year and another way the next year, looking at his fights against the industries that are to-day being endowed or bonused or given increased protection, like the woollen industry, which within a year he has denounced as being run upon old fashioned ideas, and having to suffer from that rather than from competition-looking into all these things I know of no life that is so sad as that of the gallant knight of

South Oxford-driven from party to party from constituency to constituency, driven from his constituency into the open road among the thistles and the weeds, and there left wandering until allowed to find a little rest in the department which he had said was of no use on earth, and goodness knows where his final resting place will be among the gentlemen who have him in charge.

The gallant knight took an opportunity to lecture this House for five or ten minutes last year as to the purity of the party with which he was associated, and the infamous corrupt character of the party on this side of the House. I thought that perhaps his memory had lost itself ; I was not surprised at that, age does have that effect, but it was astonishing to me that he didn't remember some of the history of the other side of the House. I thought that the gallant knight himself bore a reputation for electoral purity, and that he had fought his fights with an honest purpose, an honest desire, and with honest influences. I was astonished on looking up his history, to find him to be a self-confessed corruptionist. I found, Sir, that speaking in Napanee in 1873, Sir Richard Cartwright is reported in his own paper to have said :

He knew there was a large number of men in the country who wanted to be bought. He knew that because he had bought them twice.

When I read that and read a little farther down remarks made at the Club Nationale by his leader, as follows :

I would have you rely mainly on the justice of your cause, yet I have learned by experience that we must not forget those human devices that are so essential to victory.

It was then that I discovered the thread that kept together the Minister of Trade and Commerce and the Prime Minister of this country. It was that which accounted for the fact that they have never absolutely separated. There was one thing that they held in common, and that was the idea that power must be had, let the cost, or the conditions, or the influence used, be what they might. I was astonished when I read that, and I could not allow this opportunity to go by without putting this part of the record of the gallant knight of South Oxford on the pages of ' Hansard,' so that he may see that I have attempted to draw a true picture of his political life, and that I have not left out the facts which be must know t possessed at the time I was speaking. There may be many things I have not mentioned, but if there are it is because they have passed from my memory, or I have not a record of them. I would not like to mention anything in connection with his political history except from documentary evidence. Anything I have said of the gallant knight of South Oxford is to be found in the printed documents and in historical records of this country and of other countries, in the courts of law and in various places where Mr. POPE.

la man's history that is so peculiar as his is can be found. Now, before I consider the question of tariffs or revenues, it would be as well that we should follow up a little further the record of the gallant knight of South Oxford as it has appeared from time to time in the pages of history and in ' Hansard.' It does seem strange that a man who is supposed to be possessed of such extraordinary ability as the gallant knight of South Oxford should be living the peculiar life that was pictured by the right hon. Prime Minister in his description of him at the banquet some year or two ago. But we find this statement so recent, and we find this utterance coinciding so well with all the utterances of the gallant knight from South Oxford during the past twenty years, that if we had not the word of my right hon. friend himself at that banquet that his colleague had led a double life we would be disposed to disbelieve him. We would be disposed to think that it was one of those things that just leak out the same as information leaked out with reference to certain [things that took place in this House the other evening. But I find the right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce using the following language :

I say our protective system was a huge mistake in so far as it was honest at all, and in so far as it was not honest, it was a huge scheme of robbery. A small ring and clique of combiners and protected manufacturers, who, as I have told you, have been permitted for years past to make a prey and plunder of the people of Canada, have held sway.

He says again :

I stand by the declaration I have made, that protection is nothing more nor less than a deliberate, legalized and organized robbery ; and, more than that, if you do not stamp it out it is the very high road to political slavery first, and industrial slavery afterwards.

[Considering that, considering the speech that we had delivered yesterday, and considering the promise we had from the lips of the hon. Finance Minister that not only had he done something in the way of protection yesterday, but that he had retained in the tariff of Canada the elements of incidental protection and that he proposed to consider for the future whether he would do more or not through the investigations of the commission, I ask is it not astonishing that the man who gave utterance to these words, and did so over and over again, should be the man who was selected to second the speech made by the hon. Finance Minister yesterday '! But, Sir, that is not all :

Our policy from first to last has been to destroy the villainous system of protection by free trade, revenue tariff, or continental free trade.

Well, Sir, they have our policy and here I believe I speak for my hon. friends be-

side me. Our policy is death to protection and war to the knife to corruption.

Mind you, he had discovered that men could be bought, because he tells us that he had bought them himself. He knew that corruption had been going on.

We strike and we will strike for liberty and freedom from this system of protective taxation.

The system that the right lion, gentleman has supported and drawn his salary under as a minister of the Crown for the last seven years.

And I can tell the hon. gentleman that we will not rest until the slavery that has been imposed upon us has become a thing of the past, and until Canadians are as free as Canadians ought to be free, to make the most they can of the opportunity God has given them.

Well, Sir, the Cartwright family have made the most of the opportunities that God has given them.

/)ur policy from first to last has been to destroy this villainous system of protection which has been grinding out the vitals of this

country We denounce the principle of

protection as radically unsound and unjust to the masses of the people, and we declare our convictions that any tariff changes based on that principle, must fail to afford any substantial relief from the burdens under which the country labours. This- issue we unhesitatingly accept, and upon it we await, with the fullest confidence the verdict of the electorate of Canada.

They waited, they got the verdict, they got office, and they maintained the system. I

I will not be satisfied until the last vestige of protection has been removed from the soil of Canada. Our great reform is to put away from the soil of Canada the last vestige of protection.

He repeats that twice in that famous statement.

If the Liberals were successful, they would cut off the head of protection at once, and trample on its body.

Perhaps if the right hon. gentleman had not been so unfortunate as to become so lame that he cannot trample, he might have been trampling on the body of protection ; but if he had been trampling on the body of protection, he would have been walking roughshod all over the colleagues who have sat to the right and to the left of him for the last seven years.

We have been attacking this policy year by year. This is an accursed system, a system accursed of God and man.

These are terrible words about a policy which he has supported for the last seven years.

The system of protection has been the bane and the curse to Canada-the bane and the curse of Canada. I repeat.

142$

I think I have read enough to show that if that right hon. gentleman had had that sincerity that some hon. gentlemen on his side of the House have had on some occasions, he would have pursued a different course. We all remember that when the right hon. leader of the government tried to induce another member of his government who did not agree with the principles of the party to remain silently in possession of a cabinet position and let somebody put through the Grand Trunk Pacific Bill, the hon. gentleman got down and out. Where did the right hon. gentleman learn that trick He has known of one hon. gentleman who had for eighteen years been passing these resolutions and making these speeches from one end of Canada to the other, enunciating doctrines that he did not believe in. What an example this is to young men in public life in Canada ! Here you have the life-history of a man like the hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce, who, all these years, had been teaching and preaching a doctrine that he did not believe in, and which was an impracticable and impossible doctrine to apply in this country, asking the young men of Canada to follow under the flag which he raised and to support and endorse the false principles which he enunciated. I believe it would be better for men like this to be confined to no party at all, and that they should be required to depend absolutely on public opinion, because if that were the case we would not be bothered with them in public life in this country so long as we have been bothered with the hon. gentleman. It was under the cloak of party that, searching from place to place through the great province in which he was born, he managed to pawn himself off from time to time upon the indulgence of certain political alliances which found him a seat in this House. We have something more. In 1882 Mr. Cartwright, referring to Mr. Tilley's surplus, said :

I ask bow it was got. $1,000,000 was derived from two of the most odious and oppressive taxes which were ever imposed in any civilized country before, under similar circumstances at least-the taxes on breadstuffs and fuel. If he really wants to relieve the people, let him remove the taxes on bread stuffs and coal.

Well, there is a tax to-day on bread-stuffs and fuel, and there has been a tax on them since 1896. If that tax was infamous then, it is infamous now, and it has been infamous for the last seven years during which the hon. gentleman as a member of the government has levied it. If, Mr. Speaker, we are not to accept the word of public men in opposition ; if public men are allowed to break with impunity every pledge and every promise they make to the people, what is to become of public life in Canada. Here are men sitting on ,the treasury benches who are committed by

resolution year after year published in the ' Hansard ' and published in the press ; here are men with resolutions of the Ottawa) conference staring them in the face ; here they are to-day, the openly confessed violators of every principle they ever professed. What respect can the public have for men who profess one doctrine in opposition and practice another when in power. If such conduct goes unpunished, it will be ims possible to build up that moral tone in public life which makes a country great. And, Sir, the word of a Canadian statesman should be as good as his bond in power! or out of power. What respect can the people of Canada have for a leader of public opinion, who like the knight from) South Oxford allows himself to occupy the miserable position of being fifth wheel to a coach, as he himself said, and who for the sake of the emoluments of office goes back on all his resolutions and all his pledges to the people. If that is the price of great men they come cheap in this coun-' try. Mr. Fielding, in Noya Scotia, had this to say :

That while it is as a rule inexpedient to deal with Dominion questions in this House, in view of the obnoxious character of the duty on breadstuffs, the House must firmly protest against the imposition of such duties.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Permalink
CON

June 8, 1904