Mr. SAM. HUGHES.

I am highly gratified with the result of the debate. We have obtained an expression of opinion from the First Minister, and also from the member for Richelieu (Mr. Bruneau) and also from the leader of the opposition, I would like to compliment the hon. member (Mr. Bruneau) upon the very able speech he delivered, but 1 regret that my want of familiarity with the language in which he addressed the House has prevented me following his speech closely. However, I knew enough of it to know that the first to uphold colonial representation in the imperial parliament was a French Canadain. I learned among other important and new facts contained in that speech, that the time is not far distant when others of that race in Canada may be found advocating the same imperial policy.

Before the dinner hour the hon. member for Vancouver (Mr. Macpherson)-who is now conveniently absent from his place- rose to reply to my remarks and by his profession you would imagine he was a follower of the meek and lowly one, while from his practice you would think he was a representative of the nether regions, judging by the manner in which he plunged into your humble servant, because, as he said, X fiad charged members on that side of the Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

House with favouring independence and annexation. I hold in my hand ' Sir Wilfrid Laurier and the Liberal party ' by Willison and on page 114 will be found an aiticle from the pen of the present Prime Minister, written long years ago I admit, and not at all in accord with his views of to-day. I will not now place it on ' Hansard. It I referred to the fact that gentlemen on that side of the House had favoured such views, it was only to show what power there is behind the old silken cord that binds Canada to the motherland, to win such a distinguished gentleman as the Prime Minister of Canada to the views which we are pleased to know he entertains to-day. I could show that the hon. the Postmaster General has also been won around, and that he is to-day among the first to wear the decoration of his sovereign. I have here also a magazine called the 'World's Vlork, ni

,4-i /il tltn tlf*ll

of an hon. member of this House, a young gentleman who is personally one of the greatest favourities I have in the Dominion.

I shall not read that article. I do not find any fault with my hon. friend for writing it I am tolerant enough to let any man in this country hold whatever views he wishes.

I hold my own views and I am prepared to meet any man face to face and eye to eye in friendly- assertion of those views. I trust that" long before another half century rolls around we will find my young friend following in the footsteps of his worthy leader, to become one of the most ardent supporters of imperial federation. But, Sii, when the hon. member for Vancouver (Mr. Macpherson) charges me with intolerance, lie is not speaking by the eard. I presume that the parallels he drew were of subjects nearest his heart. I am not sufficiently at home in the society referred to, to know exactly the kind of professions of virtue to be found among the people to whom he referred ; I am willing to accept him as a competent authority on all such matters. 1 think the House will agree with me that from first to last I made no profession of my superior patriotism or my superior

loyalty. , ,

Therefore the hon. gentleman s remaiks fell very flat. I was also very much surprised to hear him stand up in this House and censure his leader. I presume that it was the right hon. the First Minister to whom he evidently referred when he spoke of shouldering rifles ; I was thunderstruck to hear the hon. member for Vancouver stand up and censure the right hon. gentleman for the remark he made about shouldering a musket in 1885 on the banks of the Saskatchewan over a paltry question of land surveys. I think the j-p.-ht hon. First Minister should take the hon. member for Vancouver to task. Times are going hard with the right hon. gentleman to-day, and I think the least the hon. member for Vancouver could have

nolle would have been to hold his tongue in solemn silence. on such an occasion. Another hon. gentleman has endeavoured to make an apology-I do not know where he is from-has told us how he has been for forty years practising medicine. Well, we all know what some of these worthy gentlemen are who go bumping around the country-they think they own it.

The member for Hants (Mr. Black).

Mr. SAM. HUGHES.

Is that where he comes from ? Long years I used to have r high opinion of the people of Hants. I must say that, unless there has been some misadventure, I shall have to change my opinion of the people there. This gentleman came to the House and undertook to cast a slur on a great many people of this country who imp pen to be of English descent. We accept the apology which lie has made to the House with very bad grace, and I trust that he will not do it again. He has been taught a lesson which may take the bumptiousness cut of him. It is said that the Divine architect of the universe stamps on each countenance the type of conscience that lies beneath. I am satisfied that the hon. members who heard the speech of the hon. gentleman on that occasion, and have seen the abject, crawling manner in which lit' got out of it, will realize that stamped on the hon. gentleman's whole outfit is the framework of the conscience that lies beneath it. I again thank the hon. member for Richelieu (Mr. Bruneau) for his remarks, although, as far as I could glean them, they were not strongly favourable to the views I have presented here to-day. Nevertheless, they were kindly given, and they opened up the discussion of the whole subject. And let me say to my worthy leader (Mr. R. L. Borden) as I say to the First Minister, that long years ago when I had the honour of standing in this House and advocating colonial assistance in imperial wars, I managed for two years in succession to coax a Conservative member of the House, military man at that, to second my resolution. I could not get a seconder except by courtesy. I was told that it was impossible to carry cut the scheme, and any who turn up ' Hansard ' will find that on those occasions I had to speak alone. I am not very old; it is not very many years since those ideas were first placed before the House, and the motion withdrawn, as I intend to withdraw this motion. 'My object was to educate the people. I have great faith in the horse sense ernl sound judgment of the people. My object was then, as it is now, to place the facts before the people, and I am satisfied that the result, ultimately, will be to bring about the aim I have in view. I have lived, and the First Minister has lived, to see my

idea of colonial assistance in imperial wars carried out and carried out successfully. The colonies were all represented in the South African war on the identical lines proposed again and again by me ; and which lines were pronounced impracticable by all parties sixteen years ago. I hope that the First Minister and all of as will live to see, perhaps not in the exact form in which I have laid down here to-day, but in some suitable form, the idea of a full partnership between Great Britain and her colonies carried out-a partnership in whicli ail members of the empire will have equal part. I understood my hon. friend from | Richelieu to say that Canada would be only a small part of the great imperial concern. Well, Canadians are not noted for taking a back seat, on the contrary, they are noted for being aggressive ; and I feel satisfied that in any such confederation as that which has been spoken of to-day, we shall have the voice not only o^Canadian representatives, but representatives from Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. I hope it will be only a year or two before we meet with Great Britain in full partnership parliament and if the motherland insists on the dog wagging his tail, the tail may take the i.otion to turn around and wag the dog, for the colonies will soon, combined, be more powerful than the motherland. But there would he no question of Motherland vs. Colonies. The lines would be drawn otherwise. I thank the First Minister for his kind words and the leader of the opposition for his kind words, and above all I thank my good friend from Richelieu for the kindly manner in which he has discussed the subject which I have had the honour to lay before the House and the country. I beg Mr. Speaker, to withdraw the motion.

Mr. ALEX. JOHNSTON.

Mr. Speaker, before this matter is finally disposed of, there are just one or two observations that i desire to make in tile absence of my hon. friend from Vancouver (Mr. Macpherson). The hon. member for Victoria and Hali-berton (Mr. Sam. Hughes) has intimated that my hon. friend from Vancouver (Mr. Macpherson) is conveniently absent to-night. Well, Mr. Speaker, I am in a position to state that the hon. member for Vancouver has good reasons for being absent, and the insinuation comes with very bad grace from my hon. friend (Mr. Sam. Hughes) that he has other than good reasons for not being here. But so far as regards the observations addressed by my hon. friend from Vancouver (ill-. Macpherson) to this House, I have only to say that I endorse every one of them.

Mr. SAM. HUGHES.

Just what I would expect.

Mr. A. JOHNSTON.

No doubt, and I have no doubt also that that is just what every member of this House would desire

the hon. member for Victoria should think. It ill becomes him to stand up in his place and cast insinuations of disloyalty and pass reflections on the loyalty of hon. members on this side. I might give the hon. gentleman the record of some of his own leaders in the past. When I was young in politics I heard the same old insinuations cast against the loyalty of the Liberal party in this country, but the more I have studied the history of that party the more I am convinced that at all times it has been distinguished by its loyalty to the British empire. In the days when the Liberals were in opposition their loyalty was as strong to the Crown and empire as could possibly be that of the party of which the hon. member for Victoria is so distinguished an ornament. But what do the records of that party show ? Do they not show that the only men in this country who signed manifestos asking for annexation to the United States were menjwho led the Conservative party, one of whom was the Conservative First Minister in the House of Commons, of whom the hon. member for Victoria was a meek and humble follower ? My hon. friend, however, conveniently forgets that little fact when he is treating this House to his philippics on loyalty. I am not going to take my cue from him and make any insinuations against the quality of his allegiance to the empire, but, like my hon. friend from Vancouver, I am quite prepared to resent any similar imputations from the hon. gentleman or any of those he supports. A few moments ago, when addressing this House, my hon. friend from Victoria (Mr. Sam. Hughes) professed that he did not understand the allusions made to rifles by my hon. friend from Vancouver (Mr. Macpherson). Well, Mr. Speaker, I propose to give my hon. friend a little enlightenment on that point. If he will turn to the Montreal ' Gazette ' of the 27th February last he will find there an explanation of that allusion. He will find there an interview with a gentleman by the name of Sam. Hughes.

Mr. SAM. HUGHES.

Read it.

Mr. A. JOHNSTON.

I intend to ; and I think that after I have read it, the House will come to the conclusion that it ill becomes that hon. gentleman to get up here and prate about the unity of the empire. If there is one man in this country who has sought to foster a spirit of disunion in this country, it is the hon. member for Victoria (Mr. Sam. Hughes). Let there be no mistake about that.

Some.hon. MEMBERS. Oh, oh.

Mr. A. JOHNSTON.

My hon. friends opposite, who are seated around the hon. member for Victoria, may well laugh at him. I do not blame them. They are doing the right thing when they show their opinion of their colleague by laughing at him.

Mr. A. JOHNSTON.

Oh, oh.

Mr. A. JOHNSTON.

I knew my hon. friend's opposite could not refrain from showing by their laughter the opinion they have of their colleague. The people of this country after all can be trusted for their good judgment in matters of this kind ; and it is comforting to myself, as I am sure it must be to every hon. member on this side, to find that even my hon. friend's own colleagues, the men who sit behind him on his own side, think so little of his professions and declarations in a matter of so much importance that they cannot refrain from laughing at him. It is rather gratifying to us on this side to find that the opinions of this hon. gentleman are regarded as of so little importance even by his own friends. But what does the hon. gentleman say ? He was interviewed in Toronto a short time ago regarding an important question before the people of this country to-day. And let me say here that this is peculiarly a time when men who desire that our people should live in unity, -when men occupying respon-ible positions in this country and anxious to see good will prevail among all classes, should speak calmly and preach moderation and tolerance. We are here of different races, different origins, different religions, and it is important that we should live in union, peace and harmony side by side ; and, so far as I am concerned, I am determined that what little I have to do in public life shall be in the direction of bringing about a better union and greater harmony among the various people, races and religions which make up our nationality. But what does my hon. friend from Victoria do, and what are some other hon. gentlemen who occupy front benches on the Conservative side doing 1

Mr. LALOR.

How about your own side ?

Mr. A. JOHNSTON.

Have no fear with regard to my side. Let me say to my hon. friend from Haldimand (Mr. Lalor) : You do not find any appeals going out from the front benches of the Liberal party or the back benches of the Liberal party to the people asking them to stir up religious strife throughout this Dominion. But such appeals have gone forth from the front ranks of the Conservative party. They have gone forth from the man who occupies a seat to the right of the hon. gentleman who leads the Conservative party in this country. -

Oh, oh.

Mr. A. JOHNSTON.

Hr. SPROULE.

I rise to a point of order. The hon. member for Cape Breton (Mr. A. Johnston) has made a statement with regard to myself, has alleged concerning me a certain fact. I emphatically deny that statement, and I ask the hon. gentleman to withdraw it.

Mr. A. JOHNSTON.

Mr. Speaker, if the statement I have made is not absolutely in accordance with the facts, I shall be glad to withdraw it. But let me submit to my hon. friend (Mr. Sproule) the point whether-

Mr. SPROULE.

I rise to a point of order. I want the statement withdrawn. He has no right to make that statement in this House.

Mr. SPEAKER.

I think that when the hon. gentleman (Mr. Sproule) denies the statement his denial must be accepted and the statement withdrawn.