I suppose that when the public moneys are to be distributed under this Bill, they must be distributed equitably among the public and separate schools. If a certain amount of money is to go to one section, and there is only one school, that school will get more than it would if another school were established in the same section. That, I think, is self evident. I expressly said that I gave this as an illustration of how it would work out. I suppose it will be admitted that, as that country is sparsely settled, it must be rather hard, in many sections, to maintain the schools. If another school is started in the neighbourhood, a heavy burden is placed upon both classes of the community and the schools are less efficient than they otherwise would be, I have another reason. I was in the Northwest about two years ago. I found regions which foreigners, as for instance the Galicians, have come in and settled. Now, if the Galicians get control Of the school in one section, is it more likely or is it less likely that Americans, let us say, will settle there under the proposed legislation than they would if the public school only could be established there ? As a practical question is it not clear that the moment a number of foreigners settle in one section, they will effectively exclude Mr. NORTHRUP.
other people settling in that section unless they are prepared to accept the conditions that would be suitable to foreigners ? Take, for instance the Galicians, and speaking of them with all respect. Is it unfair to say that the children of Galicians not knowing a word of English, would not be regarded as the most profitable fellow-students at school for the children of a farmer coming from the south side of the line. Therefore I venture to say that the idea of splitting up the schools is not calculated to improve the class of immigrants coming into the country and that it will practically shut out from the country a great deal of a certain and excellent class of immigration.
I have tried calmly and quietly to call the attention of the hon. gentlemen opposite to the fact that a majority may have feelings as well as a minority, and that it would be well in all these matters to consider the feelings of the majority as well as the feelings of the minority. I trust, Sir, that since it has been admitted on both sides of the House that painful excitement exists in the country, that fears have been aroused and passions excited, that probably many long days will be required to quell, I think I am justified in view of these facts admitted on both sides of the House, in appealing to the right hon. gentleman to tell us what is meant, and either say that the Finance Minister was wrong in his definition, or if he stands by what he says and calls it right, then let us here to-night, before we leave this chamber, settle on terms which will be satisfactory to every one of the majority in Canada who would gladly see all the children of this country trained every day in the year, for half an hour or more, in the faith taught them by their fathers.