April 7, 1905

CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

I do not want my hon. friend to think that I was putting any obstacles in the way while he was out of the House.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Mr. EMMERSON.

I beg your pardon for having had to be out, it was a matter of urgency, and I am sorry I was not present to hear my hon. friend's remarks.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEX.

I will sum up in a few words what I said. I said that it had been the hon. gentleman's policy, and it hird been the policy of prominent members of the Liberal party in the past to acquire the Canada Atlantic as an extension of the Intercolonial to Georgian bay. The hon. gentleman will remember that he advocated that three years ago, I think, in this House, other prominent members of his party have done the same thing, and we have advocated it on this side of the House. I pointed out to the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Macdonald) that the government might yet conclude that it is the best policy, and that it would be meaningless, absurd, and an inconceivable thing that they should pass this legislation and then in the same session and in the next breath pass an Act authorizing us to take over this railway, to acquire it absolutely as the property of the government. Therefore, it seemed to me to be only a reasonable thing that we should under these circumstances, hear the minister's explanation before passing this Bill. I would think that that view would commend itself to my hon. friend ; because, although he has to bow. I suppose, ,to the opinion of the majority of the cabinet in this regard. I feel so fully convinced of the soundness of the judgment of my hon. friend on this matter. as announced in this House, that I Mr. R. L. BORDEX.

believe at the present moment, if he were able absolutely to mould the policy of the cabinet in this regard, he would tell my hon. friend from Pictou not to press this legislation, because he proposes to bring down a Bill authorizing this government to take over that railway from Montreal to Parry Sound and to operate it as a part of the Intercolonial. I am sure that I can rely sufficiently on the sincerity of my hon. friend to justify me in expecting that he will now stand up in this House and say that that is still his opinion and that if he could have his own way as to the policy of the government he would adopt that very policy which he so ably advocated about three years ago in this House.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Mr. EMMERSOX.

That is departing from the suggestion which I made. The Bill need not pass now, but it can go through committee, and thus expedite business and then stand for the third reading, before which time the government Bill will be before the House, and I will have made my explanations. I know my hon. friend is always very sincere, as I am.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

My hon friend pays me a high compliment.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Mr. EMMERSOX.

I trust he cannot outmatch me in a matter of sincerity.

The hour for private Bills having expired, the Speaker took the chair.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink

PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IX THE NORTHWEST.


House resumed consideration of the proposed motion of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, for the second reading of Bill (No. 69), to establish and provide for the government of the pro-ince of Alberta, and the amendment of Mr. It. L. Borden thereto.


CON

Haughton Lennox

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HAUGHTON LENNOX (South Sim-coe).

Mr. Speaker, when you left the chair at six o'clock I was directing the attention of the House to an important statement made by the Hon. Colin Campbell, the attorney general of the province of Manitoba, and I was pointing out that an unfortunate state of things had arisen, namely, that the memory of the right hon. leader of the government conflicted with the memory of the two members of the cabinet of the province of Manitoba on several important matters.

I was intending to pursue the matter a little further and to point out some other circumstances in the same line. But I have probably said enough to direct the attention of the House to the fact that it is not after all so much a question of defective memory, as of the fact that the government has so conducted this business, both in the House and out of it, that we have the spectacle to-day of a serious conflict, not only between the right hon. gentleman and the premier of the Northwest Territories, but with two mem-

bers of the cabinet of Manitoba as well. Let me call attention to the position bedveen the premier of the Northwest Territories and the government, it is admitted to be a vexed question as to what school system shall prevail in the Northwest Territories, and whether there shall be the vindication or the subversion of provincial rights. That matter was only referred to incidentally and not discussed at all the very day when the Bill was introduced with the original clause 16, which caused so much trouble, and which is causing so much trouble in the House to-day in its amended form. The right hon. Prime Minister thinks that he was perfectly justified in treating the premier of the Northwest Territories in a way that has been often described in this House, so much so that he cannot fail to realize that the people of the west are feeling that they have been slighted through their representative because of the manner in which he has been treated. Enough has probably been said about that, but new matters arise to-day in connection with the same kind of treatment meted out to the representatives of Manitoba. We have had a certain amount of quibbling by hon. members on the other side of the House as to whether or not the premier did or did not promise to give these gentlemen another interview. I do not care about that. From the evidence I read this afternoon, from other evidence and from the intrinsic evidence of the case, I am convinced that the country is satisfied that there was an understanding at the time these gentlemen parted from the premier and we know the unfortunate position of the right hon. gentleman, putting it in the best way we can. When we go to the records, when we go to ' Hansard ' and take the language of the right hon. gentleman himself no more unfortunate condition, no more unfortunate position as regards the Dominion in relation to the provinces could possibly exist than that which is recorded at page 4110 of the unrevised ' Hansard ' in the language of the right hon. gentleman himself. It comes to this that he left these gentlemen upon the understanding and with the statement that he | would let them know in a few days what his policy would be, and he never let them know until he introduced his Bill into the House on the 21st February. Is that the way to treat provinces ? It is a little province, it is true. It is said to have offended the government, but it is said to have pleased the masses of the people in this country. The right hon. gentleman said that it should have no extension of its boundaries. It is a discussable question, I admit, whether the boundaries shall be extended or not, but I claim that for the provinces that they must be treated as sovereignties even by the sovereign and federal parliament of Canada. When the right hon. gentleman said, as he told us, that he would let them know in a few days and when he came

before the House and announced his policy without letting them know he was not treating them as the representatives of that province deserved to be treated. This is the language of the hon. gentleman :

What are the facts ? As stated yesterday, We received in the month of January, towards the end of it, the request of the Manitoba government for a conference. We agreed to that conference, and it took place on the 17th of February. There were present a subcommittee of council and the question was discussed.

Now we come to what the premier says he did.

We told the delegates that they should have an answer at an early date. That answer they had.

Where ?

That answer they had on the floor of this House four days later, on the 21st of February, when I introduced the Autonomy Bills, and in the course of my explanation stated our position with regard to the boundaries of Manitoba was clearly defined.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we have this state of things that the premier of the Dominion, having invited the representatives of Manitoba to a conference, having partially discussed the matter with them and not having determined his policy, tells these gentlemen that he will let them know in a few days, he determines his policy, he decides that he will not extend the boundaries of Manitoba to the west which they have asked him to do, and having determined that he does not think it worth while to let these gentlemen know, does not think it worth while to send a letter to them even to announce his decision. but allows them to get it with the body of the public through the newspapers when announcing his policy in connection with the Bills which he was introducing on the 21st of February.

Now, I come to the main point to which I shall direct my attention this evening and which, will, I think, stamp it indelibly upon the minds of the people, at all events upon the minds of the members of the House is that it is no accidental condition that we are dealing with to-day ; that the manner in which the whole Autonomy question has been conducted and the whole line of policy pursued by the premier are the result of a deliberate scheme, of a deliberate plan by which the Territories were to be deceived upon this school question. We know very well with what unseemly haste, in so far as the premier of the Northwest Territories is concerned, the right hon. gentleman introduced the Bill, and with what unfortunate haste as regards the then absent members of his government. There is no evidence even that the Bill, after having been prepared by the sub-committee, was submitted to the Council before it was introduced into the House. I take the responsibility of the statement that there was a plan

formed to deceive the Northwest Territories into the belief that the school question was settled and settled in the manner proclaimed from 1896 as the policy of the west ; that is a free national school. I will not depend upon assertion for that. I will refer to the documents of the House and the testimony of a gentleman whom, I think, the government will not be in a position to question. In 1902 in this House we were discussing in committee the question of the grant to the Northwest Territories for the purposes of government and the Minister of the Interior was asked to make a statement in reference to the question of autonomy. Without referring to a great many of the statements that were made in connection with the discussion I may say that Mr. Boyd, then a member of this House, called the attention of the hon. gentleman to the question of public schools in a very pointed way. He said as recorded in ' Hansard ' at page 3085.

The government might just as well admit that the delay is caused by the question of the schools, and the question of the language, and don't think for a moment that the people in the Northwest are not pretty well aware of that.

We have the challenge of Mr. Boyd, and I will read to you the reply of the Minister of the Interior at that time in reference to the position in which the schools stood. The minister said :

I think they will admit that rash haste with regard to a question of such vast importance- a question which must be satisfactorily settled if settled at all-rash haste would not at all be conducive to a settlement which would be satisfactory in the long run to the people of the Territories. I would not feel that I was taking an unreasonable position before this House if I said : that if the people of the

Northwest Territories geit a reasonable and satisfactory settlement, a settlement that the people of Canada and the people of the Territories particularly will regard as a good settlement ; a fair and reasonable settlement promising permanency ; promising lack of agitation, and difficulties and applications for reopening of the case in future years-if they get such a settlement within three or four years I should feel very well satisfied indeed, and I should feel that we have accomplished that result in a comparatively short time.

Then Mr. Sifton points out that we have a draft Bill furnished by Mr. Haultain, the provisions of which, he says, will require consideration; and, after discussing the financial aspect, the question of the lands and minerals, he comes to the school question, and he says:

I know of no political game that can be played, and so far as the separate schools are concerned, my own view is that the school question is settled so far as the Northwest Territories is concerned. I understand that the settlement at which they have arrived-and I am very happy to be able to express that opinion-is a satisfactory settlement, and that the Roman Catholic people on the one hand and Mr. LENNOX.

the Protestant people on the other, feel that they have a satisfactory compromise, and that there is no necessity for difficulty or agitation upon the question.

Tbe leader of the opposition especially refers to the statement of the Minister of the Interior, that the people of the Northwest had come to a satisfactory settlement of the school question and that there would be no possibility of any trouble in reference to that in the future, as the policy of provincial rights had been recognized, and says (' Hansard,' page 3113) :

I am glad to know that my hon. friend regards the school question in that country as satisfactorily settled, and I trust it is so.

We therefore have the announcement of the Minister of the.Interior that the people of the west had settled the school question, and that to the people of the west it would be left. We also had his statement-and in the light of after events it is rather interesting-that it would take three or four years' of negotiation, conferences and general consideration and one year's solid work, to determine the financial and other questions and clauses. That announcement is in strange contrast with the way this legislation was rushed down to the House this session after a few days' preparation, and in the absence of tbe Minister of the Interior himself. I submit that this was not accidental, but that the evidence shows that there was a desire to stifle an expression of opinion by the people of the west, and to prevent them presenting their case before the government of Canada. The draft Bill submitted by Mr. Haultain deals with finan-veial questions and general constitutional questions alone, and there was an absolute omission from it of any reference to tbe school question. Did the government point out to him that there was this omission, and did they tell him that they were going to deal with the question themselves.? Nothing of the kind. The right hon. gentleman did everything he possibly could to stave off public discussion, and through the Minister of the Interior announced that it would be a matter of conference and discussion between the two high contracting parties but when it came to the crux he stifled discussion. When the Prime Minister wrote to Mr. Haultain on the eve of last election, did he tell Mr. Haultain that he had changed his idea with regard to the school question, and that he intended to bring it into the arena of Dominion politics ? Not a bit of it. On the contrary, he wrote to Mr. Haultain that he would have on the floor of parliament a larger number of representatives from the west, and that the other questions involved would be considered. The right hon. gentleman is very fond of boasting that he has a mandate from the people, but where is his mandate from the people on this question, a question which, above all others, requires that the voice of the elec-

torate should be distinctly heard on it? In the late elections, throughout the whole west, there was no announcement by the government that the new provinces would be deprived of their control of education. When the Minister of the Interior was asked to speak upon the question of education, he told the people, forsooth, that the matter could not be discussed except at a full cabinet meeting, and yet in his absence, and in the absence of the Minister of Finance, the question is dealt with and the people of the west kept in the dark. The people of the west were told that the ministers from the Northwest Territories would have the fullest opportunity to consult the Dominion cabinet assembled in force, but the fact is that the representatives of the Territories were not summoned to Ottawa until after the departure of the Minister of Finance and Interior had departed, and this session of parliament was in progress. That may have been a clever thing for the government to do, but it is not new. They did the same thing with regard to the Transcontinental Railway, which was not discussed until the House was in session, introduced in a hurried way into parliament, and with regard to which the announcement was made that powerful interests could not wait. I wonder what interests cannot wait now. The people of Canada are asking what these interests are, and the people are bound to find out. The Minister of the Interior told us that this matter would require the greatest consideration, and that for years he had pondered anxiously over the various clauses of the Bill, but not over the educational clauses. Is not that proof that the government intended the people to understand-and it may be possible that the Minister of the Interior also understood-that this question was settled by the people of the west in a way satisfactory to themselves, and that whatever rights were established under the British North America Act would be the rights which would govern the people of that free province, and not that the parliament of Canada would endeavour to gag the people of the Territories and make them vassals of the federal powrer. The ex-Minister of the Interior says that before his departure in January last, he made out a memorandum for his colleagues in the cabinet, but not with reference to the educational clause. He says that lie was favoured with correspondence from the right lion, gentleman who leads the government, but not in reference to the educational clause. He says that there were

conferences in which this measure was discussed with members of the government, but there was no discussion ns to the educational clause. We come down then to the fact that when the Bill was prepared and submitted to the representatives of the west for their consideration, strange to say, every feature of the Bill was set out

in black and white except the educational clause, and there was not one word about that. I appeal to you, Mr. Speaker, if this does not show, in the most conclusive manner, that there was a deliberate intention to' spring this measure and to take advantage of the people at the last moment. Is it not true that until the last moment the ex-minister of the Interior and the cabinet of which he was one of the most prominent members, understood or .pretended that the measure was out of the arena of discussion, that it had been- settled by the representatives of the west, and that the people of the west were to have their rights ? But, in some way which we cannot fathom, but which we will get at in time, some silent pressure was brought to bear upon the First Minister three or four days before the Bill was introduced, and at the time when there was a question about extending the boundaries of Manitoba, this fatally dangerous question is revived, and the representatives of Manitoba are told : If you want your boundaries extended, you had better improve yo*r school policy. And told by whom? By the members of the cabinet ? By the representatives of the people of Canada ? No, not by them, but by the representative of the Holy See, who, he tells us, invited these gentlemen to meet him. Of course, we are bound to accept his statement, that it was without any sinister motive, and only casually, that he discussed the matter, but still with the object of advancing what he believed and properly believed, to be the interests of his church. I am not going to ascribe motives, but it will be for the people to say just what all this means. I am going to call the attention of the people to what I believe it means. I believe it means that a deliberate plan was formed in 1897 to work silently and in the dark, and to throw the people down on this question when the proper hour would arrive. What evidence have I of this ? I am glad to see the Minister of Justice in his place, and Iherefore I have no hesitation in referring to the eloquent way in which a few years ago he referred to a matter which is pertinent to the subject I am now dealing with. That lion, gentleman proclaimed the other night in this House that there could be no peace in this country until the minority had received their rights, and in 1896-97 this country was ringing with the same statement that there would be no peace until the minority had their rights. But in the interval, between 1897 and 1905, we had almost silence on that question ; we had a lull in the storm. Now, the people are asking what it all means and what is the impelling cause, of the very peculiar and very striking conduct of the First Minister in introducing this Bill-introducing it at this particular time, immediately after an election, and after failing to submit the question during the election, which, according

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IX THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
?

William Bullock Ives

Mr. IVES.

Any relation of Dalton ?

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IX THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
?

The SOLICITOR GENERAL.

ists in the west to agitate and agitate till they should get the full measure of justice to which they thought they were entitled. And the Minister of Justice does not make any bones about what that is. The Prime Minister does not hesitate to say what that is ? No hon. gentleman of the Roman Catholic faith who lias spoken in behalf of the government hesitates to tell us what it island it is that side by side in the schools, as you impart secular education and you shall impart religious education and training as well and you shall pay for them both out of the same fund. I do not say that they are wrong in entertaining that opinion. But I say it is a discussable question in this country ; and, if it is contended that the minority have a right to discuss it, then the majority have a right to take part in that discussion in a moderate and proper way,- and I will not say a word offensive or inflammatory ; I would rather discuss the legal aspect of the case, but I think this is not the best time for that, and besides that phase of it has been so well discussed by my hon. friend the leader of the opposition ; in *committee I may have a word or two to say on that phase of the matter. I say that, if the minority are free to discuss this matter, then, the majority certainly have a right to present their views without being denounced from day to day by the government party ns trying to raise an agitation, to inflame the minds of the people by appealing to their prejudices. I, for one, repel such an insim nation. I make no such appeals. But I say) distinctly that I do want to see the people aroused to the fact that we are, probably for the last time, dealing with a great question affecting the greater portion of the Dominion. I want the people to realize that this is a question which may determine the permanency of the British institutions on this part of the continent. I do not wish to say anything extravagant. But look at the *condition. People are pouring in there from the United States-it is the boast of hon. gentlemen opposite that thousands of them are coming in. They are people who have not been accustomed to a system of separate -schools and who will not willingly submit to separate schools. We have people coming in from all other quarters of the earth as well. Many of them have been oppressed in their own country and have had grievances not unlike to this. They have come to what they have regarded as a free country. They have come to a country in which, they were told by the" literature given them by the Minister of Interior, that they would have free national schools. These people are living alongside the United States. And the United States is watching every movement in Canada. They know and realize, as fully as Canadians do, the vast possibilities that exist in the west, and they are waiting to see if there shall arise an opportunity to annex that great and fertile territory to the United States. If we crowd these people of

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IX THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
CON

Haughton Lennox

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LENNOX.

ours too far ; if we make them restless ; if we show them that when their representatives come to Ottawa those representatives are regarded as of no account, that they are to be told : We will see you

again, and then not see them again, but proceed to introduce legislation affecting them without hearing what they have to say about it,-if this is our treatment of them, what may we exepeet ? I do not say it will happen, but I want you to be careful that it does not happen-careful that some morning, when the prosperity of Canada appears to be great, when the population of that territory is large and growing, these provinces west of the Great Lakes and reaching to the foot of the mountains may not be found contemplating throwing in their lot with the United States between them and whom are no geographical barriers, no great range of mountains or other obstacle to communication, and that we may not find out, too late, that all the power of Great Britain cannot prevent those people becoming part and parcel of the United States. It is a serious question ; there never was so serious a question in the history, of Canada, to my mind.

Now, as the question has come up, I intend to consider whether or not the Catholic church exerts a political influence-a political and sometimes a controlling political influence. I have prepared authorities and I have them here. Testimony is given both ways. An hon. gentleman on this side of the House for whom I have the greatest respect, both as regards his opinions and ns regards his candour, in expressing those opinions, has pointed out that the Roman Catholic clergy do not exert political influence. I have the testimony of the hon. member for North Simcoe last night, but I could not subscribe to his statement, that the clergy would go to the extent of excommunicating people for their ijolitiedl opinions or connections. I do not believe anything of the kind. But I will refer to authorities that will not be disputed. First, I may be permitted to give the testimony of the Prime Minister. The premier speaking in the debate on the motion for the six months hoist, recorded in ' Hansard,' on page 2758, said :

I cannot forget at this moment that the policy which I have advocated and maintained all along has not been favourably received in all quarters. Not many weeks ago I was told from high quarters in the church to which I belong, that unless I supported the School Bill which was then being prepared by the government, and which we have now before us, I would incur the hostility of a great and powerful body. Sir, this is too grave a phase of this question for me to pass by in silence. I have only this to say : even though I have threats held over me coming, as I am told, from high dignitaries in the church to which I belong, no word of bitterness shall ever pass my lips as against that church.

Now, I will take the liberty, because it involves another point as well, of referring

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IX THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink

APEJI. 7, 1905


also to the remarks of the Minister of Justice, ' Hansard ' of 1897, page 182-3 : On the eve of the last general election a pastoral letter, signed hy all the bishops of the province of Quebec, was issued and read in all the Roman Catholic pulpits of that province, in which pastoral letter was to be found this paragraph : . Therefore, my dearly beloved brethren, all Catholics shall abstain from giving their assistance or their votes to candidates who shall not bind themselves formally and solemnly to vote in parliament in favour of legislation restoring to the lOatholic minority in Manitoba the school rights guaranteed to them by the judgment of the Privy Council. Now I have many other authorities. The Minister of Agriculture last night referred to the same matter. I refer to it for the purpose of showiug that these gentlemen have exercised influence in the past, and if they have exercised political influence in the past it is important to know it, because they may exercise it in the future and they may be at work now. The Minister of Justice, after quoting from the pastoral, says : Now. those who are familiar with the conditions existing in our province, those who know something of the workings of the Roman Catho-,lic church, to which I belong, those who know something of the influence which that church possesses in the province of Quebec, will readily realize what that pastoral letter meant. And let it now, be understood that, as far as I am concerned, I do not in the least object to the interference of the Roman Catholic church in elections, hut I do object to their interfering in mere party politics. I hold that there are times when they not only have the right to interfere, but should Interfere, and I am far from taking the position that this case was not one in which they should interfere. Now the bon. gentleman says further : Was such.the case ? After saying that he expected they would be entirely neutral in election matters. Was such the case ? No. The result was- and it is well known by those who invoke those pledges to-day, and who now taunt us with having given them-that those _pledges were of no avail, but that-openly and in such a planner as amounted almost to intimidation-the cause of the other side was espoused, and these pledges were set at nought and dealt with by the other side as though they had never been given at all. Now it is not necessary to refer further to that matter. You may perhaps say that no man of any political standing would give those pledges, and you would say that the deliberations of this free parliament would not be in any way influenced by the fact of the bishops of the church of Rome having required those pledges from candidates seeking election. But that is not the ease. The greatest, the brightest minds on the list of liberal candidates for election at that time, including the Minister of Justice, 132i were of those who with a religious fervour that does them credit (as churchmen), accepted these pledges, and signed them, and / gave their adhesion to what was required by that pastoral letter, namely, that the desire and aspirations of the bishops should be consulted, and that men should pledge themselves in advance, before they entered the House of Commons, that they would not only vote for the restoration of the rights of the minority in the province of Manitoba, but that they would conform * to the wishes of the prelates to whom they bound themselves. I am not arguing whether that condition of things is right or wrong-I am directing attention to the fact that we were confronted with that condition of things in 1896, that of the candidates who were supporters of the right hon. gentleman, a fulfilment of those pledges as demanded in 1896-7, that a great clamour existed for the fulfilment of those promises; and that by reason of the mission of the Minister of Justice to Rome, a gentleman came out, and his power was substituted for the power of the clergymen of the Roman Catholic church as regards a matter which affected the political interests of the minority in this country. Now it is a logical conclusion or is it not ? If we find that in 1896 the Roman Catholic church was exercising a direct influence upon the people of Canada in that regard, that it had been exerted long before 1896, is it not prudent that we should ask ourselves to-day whether, having regard to ail the circumstances presented to us in such lurid light within the last few days, that Influence by the hand of an eminent gentleman, His Excellency the Papal delegate, is being exerted to-day ? Now, some one has been referring to the palladium of liberty, to the bulwark of liberty and so on . What Is the palladium of liberty, or the bulwark of liberty as regards the Bill ? We have the Hon. Sir William Mulock, the Postmaster! General, and we have the court appointed to investigate into this matter. We have four judges to stand between the people and any attacks that may be made upon their liberties. When I say an attack upon their liberties I do not mean a vicious attack, an absolutely unjustifiable attack ; I mean that when the advance guard of a great body comes forward to assist what they believe to be right in the interests of their church, but which we do not believe to be in the best Interests of Canada, we have as the palladium of Canadian liberty the hon. gentleman who is sleeping in his seat to-night and we have three more. I, as a Protestant-and I do not think I am saying anything offensive in saying that-rest my case mainly with him. The others may be prejudiced, they may be carried away with their religious zeal, but the champion of civil and religious liberty, the gentleman



who stood so staunchly for provincial rights, the hon. Postmaster General, who stood as the valiant defender of provincial rights in 1890-surely we can depend upon him now if he would awake out of slumber. Any way we have four. We have the premier, who has declared himself, and it was not necessary that he should do so, as a gentleman who is a confirmed and staunch believer in separate schools. We have another gentleman, the Hon. Secretary of State. Some one has said that he is a Roman Catholic. That does not matter at all, but we. have the hon. the Secretary of State. He is a Roman Catholic. We have this gentleman whose history is written in one long agitation for separate schools in this country, a gentleman, who, while discharging semijudicial duties, was issuing a pamphlet for the guidance of the electors and the members of the'House of Commons coloured to suit the case which we are opposing. We have then the Minister of Justice (Mr. Fitzpatrick) and in that hon. gentleman we have one who has declared himself honestly and fairly, as to the view he takes of this matter. It is, however, important, that, in considering the position of this question, in considering the attitude that the hon. Minister of Justice is likely to take on this matter, we should also consider the position that he stands in in regard to his pledge because he was one of those who did give a pledge in 1896. This is the pledge that the Minister gave and has more than once admitted frankly that he gave this pledge. He has told the House that he will stand by the pledge and that if he is called upon to redeem it, he will redeem it. I submit for your consideration, Mr. Speaker, if the time has not arrivel by all Indications that we see around us to-day in the city of Ottawa, both inside and outside this House, when the redemption of that pledge is being asked. It reads : Being sincerely disposed to put aside all party spirit and all questions of men, in order to secure the triumph of the Catholic cause in Manitoba, I, the undersigned, promise, if elected, to conform myself to the bishops' mande-ment in all points and to vote for a measure according to the Catholics of Manitoba that justice to which they have a right by virtue of the judgment of the Privy Council, provided that the measure be approved of by my bishop. If Mr. Laurier reaches power and does not settle the question at the first session, in accordance with the terms of the mandement, I promise either to withdraw my support or resign.


L-C
CON

Haughton Lennox

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LENNOX.

The hon. the Minister of Justice. The Minister of Justice has explained the position of the matter ; he states that he is prepared to resign whenever the time comes, whenever the crucial period comes, when the premier denies or refuses to accord to the west the right to separate schools. It may be said perhaps Mr. LENNOX.

that that referred to Manitoba. It does not refer to anything of the kind. The undertaking was otherwise. Here is one from Dr. Godbout :

I further promise to see that the same justice is rendered to the Catholics of the Northwest. Whatever government is in power, if the law which is introduced is accepted by the bishops, I promise to support it.

So that it was to apply to the west and to Manitoba as well, but the desire which seems to animate the premier to-day is to hedge around little Manitoba, circumscribe its boundaries, not to enlarge the area of national schools but to contract and circumscribe the area and extend the area of separate schools the position of which in the Territories Is so much in advance of the privileges enjoyed by the province of Manitoba, that, as His Excellency, the Papal ablegate, points out, that unless the people of Manitoba will agree to amend their school law they cannot include in Manitoba those who enjoy a higher class of religious liberty under the aegis of the Roman Catholic church than that which the people of Manitoba are enjoying.

I have spoken of the hon. the Postmaster General. I see he is awake. It is for the country to consider, notwithstanding the attitude of the Postmaster General and his well known championship of provincial rights, whether there may be any temptation on his part to surrender the citadel. The matter was well timed for that. It has been a government notorious for ' supplanters.' The extent to which dissensions have imperilled the administration has been a disgrace to the government .and when Esau, the hon. Minister of Finance was absent it was a' good time, perhaps, to apply to the Postmaster General and without saying anything improper to impress upon his mind tlie grandeur and nobility of having a great mind such as his at the head of the affairs of Canada, and to point out that, after all It might be better that the Postmaster General should represent the Dominion of Canada in succession to Sir Wilfrid Laurier, than his rival the Minister of Finance who has evidently been aspiring to the position. Well ! A vacancy was approaching, the plums were hanging above the head of the Postmaster ' General, his mouth was open and watering ] for them, and Jacob-the Postmaster General figuratively speaking-was willing In the absence of Esau to take the position, and so he capitulated to the seductive influences that surrounded him. Was that it? Or may it have been that the Postmaster General was actuated by amore noble ambition, and that he was anxious to secure the leadership of hisparty so that he might put an end to the

iniquitous infringements of the independence of Parliament Act which we, see occurring day after day. Or may it have been

that in the hands of the Minister of Justice and the Prime Minister, these two great potters so to speak, the Postmaster General was as clay and that they moulded him to their desires. When the Bill was introduced in the first instance $5,000,000 worth of property was set apart for public schools was contrary to all principles of the separation of church and state of which the Postmaster General must be an advocate if he wishes, to represent North York-made to contribute for all time to come to the support of the education system of the Roman Catholics of the new provinces. The Bill with a provision having this was presented to this House and applauded by the Postmaster General, so that one must conclude that he was but as clay in the hands of the skilful Minister of Justice. The Postmaster General will have to fight that out with the people of his own. riding if he ever faces them again; he will have to explain to them why he so cheerfully surrendered all his old principles. And, if he can satisfy the electors of North York, and if the Liberal party can satisfy the people of Canada-I do not think they will-then possibly the Postmaster General may realize that ambition to attain which he surrendered the rights of the people of the new provinces which ought to have been safe in his keeping. The hon. member for North Toronto (Mr. Foster) said yesterday that the poeple are thinking and I repeat, Sir, that the people of Canada are thinking. When this question was launched a few weeks ago it assumed great importance, but since then a further and still more important issue has been forcibly presented, that is, that undue influences are at work controlling and guiding the administration in a manner which should not be possible in a free British country. There is the fact-and the Prime Minister has not dared to deny it-that he has had conference after conference with the Papal ablegate, not only as to clause 10 of the original Bill but as to the amended educational clause which was substituted for it. This latter clause was brought in to quiet the rebellion in the Liberal camp, but so far as the vital principle is concerned as to whether or not the rights of the provinces shall be respected, there is not one tittle of difference between the new clause and the old. It is time for the people of Canada to think and they are doing their own thinking and don't you forget it. If the gentlemen on the government benches would leave the sinister influences which surround them in the city of Ottawa and go out into the country, they would find what the prevailing state of public opinion is. They would find that the people are clamouring against this Bill, and Sir, the people would clamour still more if they knew that the measure is to be rushed through this House by the force of numbers and numbers alone, to become at all events nominally the law of the land. I have met in the town of Barrie a great many Liberals-but I have not met one who has not condemned the action of the government. They are not saying much; they did not say much previous to the Ontario elections last January, but they spoke by their ballots as they dropped them into honest boxes, and they will do so again. I can tell these gentlemen opposite that they need not imagine for one moment that they are going to foist this measure upon the west in defiance of the constitutional rights of these two provinces. With Manitoba alarmed, excited, and in arms as it is against the treatment which it has received from the government, a crisis had been brought about in the affairs of Canada. That crisis is the result of the government's studied silence, of its system of misleading the people, of its system of working in the dark, of its system of retiring behind the lines of Torres Vedras before the election, and rushing out after the election, to steal away the rights of the people. Don't imagine that you can coerce the people of the west. Don't imagine that you can permanently secure even the best interests of the Roman Catholic church in this way. As the Minister of Finance said, if you treated the people of the west in a generous way, if you approached them in a fair spirit, the minority would get all the concessions they needed as is the case in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick where the Minister of Finance told us they have not separate school laws, nut where the Roman Catholics enjoy vastly greater privileges than as he would have us understand it-this legislation gives the Roman Catholics of the west. I shall say no more. This is an important question ; it is fraught with immense consequences for the people of Canada; it is a question upon which the people are thinking and it is a question which will not die. Had this measure been introduced in a more moderate manner and in a constitutional way it might be that we would hear no more of it at the next election. But, introduced as it was, in the absence of the constitutional advisers of the Crown, the people of the west lulled into fancied security as they were, the haste with which the leader of the government introduced it in the absence of the ministers, the language, the violent language, with which the right hon. gentleman introduced it, the statements which he made, the events which have occurred since involving the discussion of the influence exercised by the Papal ablegate over the Prime Minister of this country, the manner in which the representatives of the west have been treated, the manner too in which the land question and the question of timber, minerals, &c., have been dealt with-all these are questions which will live in the memory

of the people, and will not die out. I hope they will die out some time, but I hope they will not die out until this peril shall have been averted, and until the people of this country have been so aroused to place in power a wise administration which will give to the majority as well as to the minority as their constitutional right, what is in the interest of the majority and in the interest of the minority alike, bona fide provincial autonomy.

Topic:   APEJI. 7, 1905
Permalink
LIB

Onésiphore Turgeon

Liberal

Mr. O. TURGEON (Gloucester).

Hr. Speaker, at this late hour of the evening, in the closing hours of a long week's labour, and at this advanced stage of this most important debate which has brought forth eloquence seldom heard within the walls of this House, I would certainly not rise at all but that the noble sentiments that have been expressed on both sides of this House, notwithstanding occasional divergences, have recalled some other sentiments, the sentiment of gratitude and others, which one entertains according to his own particular experiences in life. I wish to say, Mr. Speaker, that born under the heavens of French Quebec, carried away in my early years to other shores in search of brothers lost, whom I knew merely by Hie history of their heroes and martyrs, I heard my name graced with kindly expressions of sympathy and best wishes from the Scotch people, the English people and the Irish people happily settled in various districts of the extensive county of Gloucester, which I now have the honour to represent. I at once was struck by the vivid expressions of sympathy and the exuberance of the cordial feelings of these peoples, who were the first to inspire my political ambition, who left their homes, their fields, their fishing boats to go to the polls to vote for me when my own kindred people had not yet thought proper to do so. This, Mr. Speaker, was at a time when the echoes of the patriotic eloquence of Joseph Howe were still vibrating through the hills and valleys of New Brunswick and the Metapedla, on the onward wave towards the western provinces which were soon to be united with the rest of Canada by ties stronger than the iron rails and bridges of the great national highway which Nova Scotia's patriot had so happily dreamed of -the more lasting the nobler ties of fraternity, equality, justice and charity. It was only a few years afterwards that the fathers of confederation, representing the different provinces of British North America, met together. May I name some of them whose names are still perhaps more familiar than others to the people at large ? Sir John A. Macdonald, Sir George E. Cartier, D'Arcy McGee, Oliver Mowat, George Brown, Sir Charles Tupper, Sir Leonard Tilley. Sitting at an international council, as I may call it, these men undertook a task of great difficulty-to lay the foundations of a new nation-a nation formed of various races and creeds. Mingling their patriotic breath

Topic:   APEJI. 7, 1905
Permalink
CON

Haughton Lennox

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LENNOX.

in one common aspiration they framed for the different provinces of British North America a constitution, an immutable constitution which would stand for the protection of the weak as well as for the welfare of the strong. That new nation, Mr. Speaker, born with the many virtues of its many races, has made good progress in the development of the resources which nature has lavished upon her until Canada is certain to be one of the great nations of the twentieth century, and, according to the creed of my faith, the greatest Christian nation of the world. Not half a century has yet elapsed since those days, and we see all the progress which Canada has made, incomparable to that of any other nation. The United States has had its time of great progress, but its growth in moral as well as material progress is not to be compared with that of Canada during the last eight or ten years. We have had the advantage of bringing Prince Edward Island into the union; we have had the advantage of bringing in British Columbia, which, with its immense resources, in lumber, in gold, in lands, in fisheries, is sure to become an Immense factor in the development of Canada. We have added the great Northwest, to which the attention of the nations of the world has lately been directed by a progressive policy of immigration which has never been equalled by any other nation, not even by the United States; and today we are called upon to give to that territory all the rights and liberties and privileges which the constitution permits us to give, commensurate with its importance, with the requirements of its progress, both moral and material, and with the immense resources which that portion of Canada contains in greater quantity than any other-resources of land, resources of forest in most districts, minerals of all kinds-resources which have been lying there undeveloped for centuries, which are appealing to human intelligence and to human activity for their development in the interest of the Canadian people; where millions will certainly live in the years to come, and will work together in unity, like the people of the older provinces; where the French, the English, the Scotch, the Irish and the Germans will all seek to give the country the benefit of their labours and of their intelligence in order to bring the Norhwest Territories to the head of this great nation, which are certainly capable of raising sufficient wheat to supply all the breadstuffs required by the British people in the cities of England or Scotland. In those provinces, by the interchange of trade and commerce, not only the true Canadian sentiment but the true British sentiment will be kept up, for these people will settle there, they will grow their wheat and they will know that that wheat will go especially to the great cities of the British empire and as trade and commercial relations create sentimental relations these

sentimental relations will be favourable to Canada and to the British empire. We have heard a great deal of imperalism in this country. Not long ago noble sentiments were expressed by the hon. member for Victoria and Haliburton (Mr. Sam. Hughes), and certainly there is something which appeals to the intelligence of every Canadian in the word 'imperalism' owing to the debt of gratitude we owe and of the continued gratitude which we expect to entertain for the British empire. 1 believe that for many years to come, for the present at least in my judgment, the best imperialism which we can offer to the British empire would be for the Canadians to produce all the wheat and all the breadstuffs which her millions of artisans in the cities of London, Liverpool and Manchester require and which they have neither the means, the time nor the land to produce, and to have those immense quantities of wheat and breadstuffs transported through Canadian channels and Canadian ports to the ports of England, Scotland and Ireland.

The prospects of those new provinces are certainly brilliant and it became no doubt a hard task for this government and for the right hon. gentleman who leads the government (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) to raise the foundation upon which these two provinces will be best able to work out their destiny and the fullest development of their progress, moral and material. Our constitution gives the government of this country many powers in the making of new provinces, and no doubt when a portion of country comes and calls at the door of this *parliament asking .for provincial rpghts, the people of that portion of the Dominion naturally expect all the freedom and opportunities possible under the constitution. It becomes then the duty of the government and of the Prime Minister to allow such rights as may be commensurate with their future happiness and prosperity. The government has to give them that right of going to seek for their future prosperity that a father gives to his child, whom he sees going from him. While the father gives his son a portion of his territory, he shows still greater attention and greater parental sentiment, when he says : My child, I give you a certain domain, but I shall not leave you all alone, I shall continue to help you with my credit and my means in order to allow' you to develop that domain as rapidly as possible without encumbrance upon yourself. When this question arose the question of land was no' doubt one that first attracted the attention of the right hon. the premier and his government. No doubt a certain class of people in those Territories, at first sight, may have thought, and thought properly in their judgment^ that they should have a claim to the lands, to the vast prairies, to the millions of acres which are still unsettled, and the development of -which will require millions of

dollars in order to be able to bring immigration sufficient for the development of those lands, and to maintain the credit of those provinces by keeping up a steady flow of immigration. Let us for a moment consider the position of the people of those provinces in reference to the possession of those lands. The moment those lands are transferred to them the people of these provinces would have to meet the expenses of that immigration of which 1 have spoken, they would have to continue the immense payments for immigration agents-in the different countries, they would have to pay the expenses of their land 'agents, and we know what a risk there is of a province under her own credit, and with her own single resources, no matter how wealthy that province may be, falling into some bad policy -which would be sufficient to at once arrest the tide of immigration and divert it to some other country. If, therefore, we compare the difference in the monetary terms granted to the people of these provinces, Saskatchewan and Alberta, as they are now7, and as they would be if the government had given the public lands to the provinces, we find that if they had the lands they would then not only have to meet the expenses of immigration, but they would have no compensation for the lands. Now, when they do not get the title to the lands, they receive compensation instead, and therefore instead of paying large sunis of money, which will continue to be paid by this government, they w7ill have the benefit of the credit of the government, of the credit of the nation, and I claim this evening, Mr. Speaker, that if the government of Canada, if the nation of Canada were to withdraw her credit as w7ell as her means from the facilities for immigration to these provinces, that might be sufficient to divert the current of immigration again to the country to the south of us, and therefore expose our provinces to the loss of innumerable immigrants. Section 19 reads thus :

Inasmuch as the public lands In the said, province are to remain the property of Canada, there shall be paid by Canada to the said province annually by way of compensation therefor a sum based upon the estimated value of such lands, namely, $37,500,000, the said lands being assumed to be of an area of 25,000,000 acres and to be of the value of $1.50 per acre, and upon the population of the said province, as from time to time ascertained by the quinquennial census thereof, such sum to be arrived at as follows:

The population of the said province being assumed to be at present 250,000, the sum payable until such population reaches 400,000 is to be one per cent on such estimated value, or $375,000.

The people of the province of Alberta or Saskatchewan wfill receive annually at first a sum of $375:000 to provide for their local needs, having the benefit, at the same time

of all that the government of Canada can do with its wealth anl Its credit to send immigrants to fill up their vacant lands. And when the population reaches a larger number ithis annual payment increases. This alone, in my judgment, is enough to prove to the people of the Territories that the government has been most careful and paternal in retaining the lands and undertaking the expenditure on immigration, and placing more money at their disposal for the first years-and this is most important -to be spent in meeting provincial requirements. Then we have heard a great deal lately about the boundaries established for these provinces, and the government has been taken to task for not having extended the boundaries of Manitoba westward, thus taking from the new provinces a portion of their lands and a portion of their population. I would like to ask some of the residents of the province of Saskatchewan, especially some of the people who live on the borders of Manitoba, and who, as is now proposed, will belong to the new provinces that have no liabilities, whether it would be more in their interest that they should remain in the new province or should join the province of Manitoba and share its liabilities, its financial endorsements and financial responsibilities. I have no doubt that the people of Saskatchewan have been strongly and urgently representing to the government of Canada that they should be allowed to remain within the limits of the new province. The new provinces are going into the union without any debt, and they are to receive from the government of Canada half-yearly in advance interest at the rate of 5 per cent on the sum of $8,107,500, or a total of $405,170 each. The people that would be taken away from the province of Saskatchewan and added to the province of Manitoba would be deprived of the benefit of that payment, and, moreover, they would be shackled by the participation in the liabilities of Manitoba. I do not wonder that every member from the Northwest Territories on this side of the House has been so decided and so urgent in his expressions of opinion on behalf of the people. It has been my good fortune lately to visit the district of Saskatchewan and to hear the expressions of opinion by the people, in the trains and hotels and also in their homes, and I have found them practically unanimous in the desire to be by themselves ; and they want to have two provinces, or even three provinces established, lest there should be any risk of their being joined to Manitoba. The people of the Northwest Territories are a business people, and they look at the question of provincial rights and opportunities from a business standpoint. It is not the course of a man of the Northwest to neglect any possible advantage, for he knows that in these days he must progress rapidly if he wants to progress at all. The people there understand Mr. TURGEON.

the future and know the vast possiblities of their resources of land, forest and mines. The virtues of all nationalities can be usefully combined to make that new country prosperous. I will not undertake to discuss from the legal point of view the rights of the Crown within the province or within the Dominion government, I am not gifted with the legal training or knowledge required to do so. But speaking from a common sense point of view, I believe that every man in the Northwest, as well as every man in the east, will admit that the Dominion government has bought and paid for the lands of the Northwest. And now, when the parliament of Canada is called upon to give provincial rights and privileges to the people of the two new provinces, it is our duty to give them the best we know and can give in order to ensure their development and future stability and prosperity. We are legislating for the happiness and proseprity of millions of Christian and British families that will be there at the end of the century, all united in a true Canadian sentiment, and, as I have said, at the same time in a true British sentiment, which will be to our advantage. In this country we do not look forward to independence, and much less to annexation ; we look for continued relations with the mother country, and relations which will grow closer all the time. As I said, give us prosperity, give us trade, give us wheat, give us coal, give us gold, give us lumber in the west, and you will have a constantly growing sentiment of loyalty to the British empire all the time. We may expect to see, through a development of navigation in Hudson bay, a revolution in the trade and in the financial conditions of American and European countries.

It has been said that Manitoba should have at once an extension of territory, if not to the west, then to the north. Mr. Speaker, we have a valuable countrv, the immense wealth of which is not yet suspected. I suspect it, perhaps, because I have taken an interest in it all my lifetime and made a lengthy visit into that country. I know that the people of my county take a great interest in that country also. It is my practice at home, whenever I pass by a school house in the county of Gloucester to go in and give a few words of encouragement to the pupils, and I always make it a point to call their attention to the inconceivable possibilities of our extensive territory to the Northwest, and to inspire in their breasts an irresistible sentiment of patriotism and pride in the immense .prospects which the development of navigation to the Hudson bay will open up to all the people of Canada. In regard to the extension of the boundaries of Manitoba, I think the government of this country has acted wisely and prudently, and that the people of the west will in future thank them for it, because that development requires further study. It is a question that affects not

only the people of Manitoba, not only the people of Saskatchewan, where my children are living, not only the future of Ontario, but it is a question affecting the whole Dominion. Therefore, every province is interested and has a right to be consulted in the question of the extension of the boundaries of Manitoba, inasmuch as every province has an interest in the opening up of a Hudson Bay route. As the eloquent member for Pictou (Mr. Macdonald) pointed out last night, the people of the province of New Brunswick have, through their legislature, drawn attention to the immense accretions of territory that have been given to Ontario and Quebec, until we in the maritime provinces are beginning to fear for our future representation in this parliament. While we do not wish to ask for any infringement upon the clauses of the constitution, still it is nothing but natural that we should call the attention of parliament to the result which may come about through the great influx of population into the western provinces, inasmuch as that result may leave us in the future unrepresented or insufficiently represented in the parliament of Canada. Therefore, I think I am voicing not only my own sentiments but the sentiments of my fellow-citizens of New Brunswick; and I believe the minister of our province, the Minister of Railways and Canals, will bear me out in this declaration that it is only natural and right that the government of Canada, in its laudable desire to promote the prosperity of the people of the west, should not take a step of such vast importance without consulting the other provinces, which are all equally interested in our national development. I think, Mr. Speaker, my view is supported by the speech of the member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott), who says that the people of the eastern portion of Saskatchewan would have objected to being brought into the province of Manitoba because they would be deprived of the immense benefit which they will receive by remaining within the limits of Saskatchewan, and would be deprived in the very first year of the sum of $202,687, besides being exposed to share the debt and possibly1 the responsibilities of another province, which has made much progress, no doubt, but which is already calling for better terms. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I regret to have heard this evening, and on former occasions, the statement that the non-extension of the boundaries of Manitoba was due to other reasons than the best interests of the people of the Northwest as a whole, and especially of the people of Saskatchewan.

But this question has another aspect. A great deal has been said about the school question. I will not attempt, Mr. Speaker, to make an appeal to your sentiment. We have heard very eloquent appeals in this

House made to sentiment. We have heard from the member for Labelle (Mr. Bour-assa), from the Solicitor General (Mr. I.e-mieux), from the member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk), not forgetting the junior member of this House, and from my hon. friend from Beauce (Mr. Behind). These hon. gentlemen have certainly delighted and astonished this parliament as well as their constituents. by their eloquence and their lofty sentiments. I have not had the honour nor the advantage of remaining in my native province, but I have spent thirty-three years of my life in another province looking after the interests of a people to whom I always speak in the language of my heart. If the scene of my activity has been laid in another sphere my sentiments have perhaps become more expanded, and the result has been no detriment to my citizenship as a fellow-Canadian. Meanwhile I have never forgotten the province of my birth, and I certainly desire to pay my compliments to the orators from Quebec who have preceded me on this question. If I have mentioned more particularly my hon. friend from Labelle (Mr. Bourassa), my hon. friend the Solicitor General (Mr. Lemieux), and my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk), none of whom, I am sorry to say, is here at the present time, it is because these honourable gentlemen have been the guests of the people of my county, who have been particularly impressed with the eloquence and wisdom of their remarks, and I can assure them that all the classes of the people of the county of Gloucester, Scotch. Irish and French, still reflect upon what they have said, and still consider the counsels which have been so eloquently given them by these three honourable members. Meanwhile, as I have said, I have not forgotten my worship to my native province, nor have I forgotten the old-time loyalty and devotion of my fathers in the province of Quebec, loyalty and devotion spoken not merely by word of mouth in the parliament of Quebec or in the publio meetings of the people, but spoken in the prayers of our mothers every evening, loyalty and devotion spoken at the altars of the Canadian people, in the prayer of the Catholic priest and bishop rising to heaven for the maintenance of the British flag in Canada, loyalty and devotion at the call of the British people in time of danger, whether it was a Fenian invasion or an American invasion in days gone by, but spoken more gloriously than ever on that memorable day, the 26th of October, 1813, on the border of Lake Champlain, when 300 French Canadians and 50 Scotchmen achieved the most heroic deed of modern ages, witnessed only by 7,000 American soldiers hastily retreating. and the heavens above rejoicing.

This question of education certainly requires the greatest wisdom on the part of every Canadian, on the part of every mem-

ber of this House, as it has required, no doubt, the greatest wisdom on the part of the government and on the part of the right hon. premier of this country. At the same time, what is there in it ?-a question of right and. justice, a question settled long ago by the highest tribunals in the Dominion of Canada and the British empire, though a question of right, which may have been doubted in the early years of confederation when we first appealed for this right. It was doubted for a moment by ourselves in the province of New Brunswick, in the early years of confederation because at that time, owing to the harmonious relations which have existed from time immemorial in the maritime provinces between Catholic and Protestant, Scotch, Irish and French Acadians, we were in the enjoyment of privileges the source of which we knew not. These privileges we had enjoyed through the generosity of the government, but whot not being compelled to think of the future, did not insert in the constitution of their province the word ' separate ' or ' dissentient ' or ' denominational ' schools and we were in a moment surprised when we were deprived of those rights. We appealed to the constitution. E very hon. member of this House, every man in Canada knows of the resolution brought into this House in 1872 by my hon. friend the member for Victoria, N.B. (Mr. Costigan) who occupies a place near to me at the present moment.- My hon. friend, who has given 38 years of usefulness to the people of Canada, is the most highly respected and esteemed senior member of this parliament. I might say en passant that while the little province of New Brunswick has given to this House its senior member in the representative of Victoria there is also, in the other division of this parliament, not only the senior member of the Senate, but the senior legislator in the world in the person of Senator Wark. I said a moment ago that this was simply a question of right and justice. When we look back to the discussion in the House of Lords' at the time the provinces of Canada were united into the confederation we find there not only an expression of the sentiments of the fathers of confederation but we find there especially an example of that greater generosity and justice which; have always been displayed in the parliament of Great Britain upon every occasion that the proper treatment of a great question required it. We find there the declaration that justice shall be given to the minority, not only to the Catholic minority but to the Protestant minority as well as the case may be. In this country where development is so rapid, where it is bound to be rapid in the future and which it is the duty of every Canadian to promote as much as possible, who will deny that perhaps in one of the provinces where to-day the majority is Protestant this condition Mr. TURGEON.

may not be reversed before the end of the twentieth century and that in that province the majority of to-day will become the minority at the end of the century ? I. say with deliberation that these things are possible and I need not go out of my own province to find an illustration of the truth of what I say. It is known that in the province of New Brunswick, for different reasons which I will not undertake to explain, the population has increased only, you might say, by the increased number of the Catholic people. Owing to different reasons the young men of English parentage, perhaps having more desire to see the greatness of the world and to seek advantages abroad, have gone in immense numbers to the New England States with the result that to-day we find more of the English sons of New Brunswick in the States of New England than we find in New Brunswick. The increase in population has been going on especially amongst the French and the Irish people who have kept their children at home. This, Sir, is a good lesson to the English iDeople that the time is past when young Canadians require to go to a foreign country to seek fortune, because in the great Northwest Territories they now have a field for their enterprise and energy. If, for the next fifty years the conditions continue the same in New- Brunswick as they have been for the past fifty years, then the Catholic people will be in the majority in that province and should that come to pass, would it not be w-ise and generous that we the Catholic people being in the majority should extend to the Protestant minority the same generosity and the same charity that they for years extended to us ? The words of Lord Carnarvon in the British House of Lords have already been quoted to this House, but I may be allowed to quote them again with the explanation that we-in New Brunswick have learned to draw from them lessons of charity and lessons of justice. Let me say that if there ever was an occasion for the display of charity and justice, it is required just now- in the discussion of this question. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) w-ho has inherited the eloquent and noble sentiments of Joseph Howe, gave us the history of the settlement of religious differences in the maritime provinces ; although trouble did arise in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick it was soon allayed through the good sense and liberality of the people. When men of fortitude came to govern in New Brunswick the province was again clothed in its golden mantle of conciliation, and harmony has prevailed among the people ever since. To-day w-e see the Acadian children and the Irish Catholic children enjoying the advantages of a splendid secular and religious education. And, Sir, the Acadian people have the same hope in the future of this country and are actuated w-ith the same desire to share in its progress and prosperity as are our

English fellow countrymen. Our Acadian people do not forget the memory of their ancestors, hut to-day they know that the violated bell of Grand Pr4 will sound for ever throughout the world to perpetuate universal sympathy for a small people deceived -not by the King of England, I am glad to say, hut by a military officer acting on his own counsel. To-day in Acadia you do not hear the lamentations of the past nor the sobs of the Acadian women bemoaning the deportation of their race ; no, Mr. Speaker, you hear the air resounding with the patriotic ejaculations of the Acadian people who are taking their place with their fellow countrymen of all races in this Canadian nation, working for its welfare and prosperity. Let me quote the words of Lord Carnarvon when he introduced the British North America Act in the House of Lords. He said :

In this Bill the division of powers has been mainly effected by a distinct classification. That classification is fourfold: First, those

subjects of legislation which are attributed to the central parliament exclusively. Secondly, those which belong to the provincial legislature exclusively. Third, those which are the subject of concurrent legislation, and fourth, a particular clause which is dealt with exceptionally.

Lastly, in the 93rd clause which contains the exceptional provisions to 'which I refer, your lordships will observe some rather complicated arrangement in reference to education. I need hardly say that that great question gives rise to nearly as much earnestness and division of opinion on that as on this side of the Atlantic. This clause has "been framed after long and anxious controversy in which all parties have been represented and on conditions to which all have given their consent. The object of the clause is to secure to the religious minority of one province the same rights, privileges and protection -which the religious minority of another province may enjoy. The 'Roman Catholic minority of Upper Canada, the Protestant minority of Lower Canada, and the Roman Catholic minority of the maritime! provinces will thus stand on a footing of entire equality.

On another occasion Lord Carnarvon in the House of Lords made this statement :

Hence the House will perceive that It is almost impossible for any injury to he done to the Protestant minority. The real question at issue between the Protestant and Roman Catholic community is the question of education, and the 93rd clause after a long controversy in which the views of all parties have been represented, has been framed. The object of that clause Is to govern against the possibility of the members of the minority suffering from undue pressure >by the majority. It has been framed to place all the minorities of. whatever religion on the same footing, and that, whether the minorities are in in esse or in posse.

I call the attention of the House to these words ' in esse ' and ' in posse ; ' whether today it is a Catholic minority, or to-morrow a Protestant minority. We have the judgment of our courts to guide us in the solution of the meaning of the British North America Act, which seems to he so misunderstood1 by certain members of this House and by certain papers in Ontario. In the New Brunswick school case, the parliament of Canada refused to entertain the resolution brought by the hon. member for Victoria (Mr. Costigan) in 1872, requesting in the name of the Catholic minority of that province that the government of Canada should exercise their veto against the provincial Act passed in 1871 which took away from the Catholic minority these extensive privileges of which I have spoken.

I must acknowledge that members on both sides of the House on that occasion expressed the greatest sympathy with the hon. member (Mr. Costigan) and with the Catholic minority in his province. But it was found on both sides of the House that under the clause relating to education in the constitution, the government of Canada had not the power to declare the New Brunswick law of 1871 ultra vires or not efficient. After the refusal of the parliament of Canada to interfere on the ground of the constitution, the Catholic minority appealed to the highest court of the province, the Sup-preme Court of New Brunswick, at that time the highest Canadian court for them, because the Supreme Court of Canada was not yet in existence. It may he necessary for me to give some preliminary explanation of the school laws of the province of New Brunswick, so that I may be better understood when I give the quotations from the judgment of the Supreme Court of New Brunswick on the question. I will only appeal to the calm facts of history which will show that that enlightened judgment has afforded lessons to the Catholic minority as well as to the Protestant majority of the province of New Brunswick, and will speak to the intelligence and heart of every member of this House and every Canadian.

It might be of interest that I should mention at once that previous to the time of confederation and after, and still at the time our appeals were under the consideration of the high tribunals, the province of New Brunswick had two classes of educational institutions, both administered under provincial statutes by the one board of education, inspected by the common provincial inspeotor, both receiving state aid or government subsidies for their maintenance and support. The general class of educational institutions was composed chiefly of rural districts, I may say, and of the population of the outskirts of a city, town or village. The more particular class of educational institutions was extended to the population of the cities, of the towns or large villages and to these particular schools greater privileges had been conferred, accordingly favourable to the religious conditions of the people for whose children these schools were particularly in-

tended, and In which religious instruction was, by law, given according to the tenets of their faith. As I stated a while ago, the former class extended to the rural districts, it more particularly carried on the supervision of elementary education and was administered under an enactment of 1858 called the Parish School Act, which was superseded in 1S71 by an Act called the Common Schools Act. It was against this new law that the Catholics appealed to the Supreme Court. Let me say also that it had been the expectation of the fathers of confederation and of the British parliament that the first clause upon education applied to all the schools, or classes of schools in New Brunswick, so strong, so general, was the prevailing opinon that the Catholic minority enjoyed denominational schools in every respect, an opinion created by the prevalent harmonious relations of the people of different races and creeds in *the maritime provinces. But upon investigation by the courts it was found that the liberties enjoyed by the Catholics of New Brunswick were not granted by the said Parish School Act of 1858, but had come into existence owing to what may legally be termed irregularities, or laxities iu tbe administration of the law. The decisions of the Privy Council and of the Supreme Court of New Brunswick maintained that the Parish School Act, 1858, did not refer to denominational schools, and therefore this Act being superseded toy the Public Schools Act of 1871, no denominational rights could be affected so long as there were none in existence by law. These judgments were based on tbe assumption that denominational privileges or rights in existence /before the union were inalienable. These tribunals searched in the Parish School Act of 1S58 for the existence of such rights as claimed by the Catholics which might have been affected by the new Act of 1871, but failed to find them.

I wish to lay stress on this point that evidently the judges of the Supreme Court of New Brunswick before writing their decision had come to the unanimous conviction that the 1st section of clause 93 of the British North America Act did apply to any province in which a class of persons enjoyed denominational principles in the schools. I wish to lay stress on this point that the Supreme Court did search the existence of any such rights, under the common understanding that should any such rights be found to exist, the court was bound by the terms of the section to see them restored.

I wish to lay stress also upon this point that had an appeal been made at the time against principles enjoyed by different classes of persons in the schools of the other classification to which I referred, the Supreme Court expressed their readiness jealously to protect them.

Topic:   APEJI. 7, 1905
Permalink
LIB

Onésiphore Turgeon

Liberal

Mr. TURGEOX.

For an illustration of this statement 1 wish to quote from the judgment of the Supreme ^Court of Canada, given in February, 1873, in the ease of ex parte Renaud and othei's, as it is called. The judges, after having looked into the particulars of the case, said :

It is contended, that the rights and privileges of the Roman Catholic inhabitants of this province, as a class of persons, have been prejudicially affected by the Common Schools Act, 1871, contrary to the provisions of subsection 1 of section 93 of the British North America Act. We have now to determine whether any class of persons had, by law, in this province, any right or privilege with respect to denominational schools at the union, which are prejudicially affected by the Common Schools Act of 1871. This renders it ncessary that we should, with accuracy and precision, ascertain exactly what the state of the law was with reference to denominational schools, and the rights of classes of persons in respect thereto, at the union. At that time, what may fairly and legitimately be called the common school system of the province, was carried on under an Act passed in the 21st Vic., c. 9, intituled ' An Act relating to Parish Schools.' There were no doubt, at the same time in existence, in addition to the schools established under the Parish School Act, schools of an unquestionably denominational character, belonging to, and under the immediate government and control of particular denominations.

And in which, there can be 'no doubt, it may reasonably be inferred, the peculiar doctrines and tenets of the denominations to which they respectively belong were exclusively taught, and therefore had, what may rightly be esteemed, all the characteristics of denominational schools, pure and simple. We do not here refer to collegiate institutions, which it has been strongly, and with great force, urged were not within the contemplation of the imperial parliament, or intended to be affected by the British North America Act, 1867, but we refer to such schools as the Wesleyan Academy, Saek-ville, as incorporated by the 12th Victoria, chapter 65, amended by 19th Victoria, chapter 65. a corporation entirely distinct in law, as we presume also, in fact, from the college which the trustees of that academy are authorized to found and establish under the 21st Victoria, chapter 57. an institution entirely under the control of the Wesleyan denomination, and in which, or in any department thereof, or in any religious service held upon the said premises, it is enacted that no person shall teach, maintain, promulgate or enforce any religious doctrine or practice contrary to what is contained in certain notes on the New Testament, commonly reputed to be the notes of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M., and in the first four volumes of sermons, commonly reputed to have been written and published by h>im.

Then it goes on again :

The Varley school, . . . the Madras school, which by its charter is to he conducted according to the system called the Madras system, as improved by Dr. Bell, and in use and practice in the British National Educational Society, incorporated and established in England.

which National Society, established in 1811. was incorporated in 1817, for promoting the education of the poor in the principles of the established church throughout England and Wales ; the schools established by such society being purely denominational, in which the children are to be instructed in the Holy Scriptures and in the liturgy and catechism of the established church, and, with respect to such instruction the schools are to be subject to the superintendence of the parochial clergyman, and the masters and mistresses are to be members of the Church of England.

They have no objection to religious education. Then the j'udgment goes on :

And the Baptist Academy or Seminary-the Roman Catholic school established in the city of St. John-'the Free school in Portland, under the Board of Commissioners of the Roman Catholic school in St. John-the Roman Catholic school in Fredericton-the Roman Catholic school in St. Stephen-'the Roman Catholic school in St. Andrews-all of which are recognized by name by the legislature in various Acts, anterior to the 21st Victoria, chapter 9, and received specific annual grants from the public provincial funds, outside the Parish School Act.

It is seen by this statement, Mr. Speaker, that the Catholics of New Brunswick at that) time were enjoying certain privileges but not under that school Act of 1871. The judgment goes on :

In the year 1857, and subsequently thereto, the money intended for educational purposes has been annually granted in a lump sum, viz., so much to provide for certain educational purposes, not specifying any particular school or purpose, as had been theretofore customary. But the estimates of the public expenditure, which appear in public journals, show that appropriations 0f a similar character have been since annually made. Thus in the year 1867, but before the 1st day of July (the day of the union), it will be seen by the Journals of the house of assembly, page 45, that in addition to the amount authorized by law, the following schools, among others, received special grants, viz. : The Madras School ; the Wesleyan

Academy ; the Baptist Seminary ; the Roman Catholic School, Fredericton ; the Presbyterian School, St. Stephen ; the Roman Catholic School, St. John ; the Varley School, St. John ; the Roman Catholic School, Milltown ; the Roman Catholic School, St. Andrews, male and female ; the Roman Catholic Schools, Carle-ton, Woodstock, Portland, and Bathurst ; the Presbyterian School, Chatham ; Roman Catholic School, Newcastle, and the Sackville Academy.

Further on the judgment says :

The Parish School Act clearly contemplated the establishment throughout the province of public common schools for the benefit of the inhabitants of the province generally, and it cannot, we think, be disputed, that the governing bodies under that Act were not in any one respect or particular ' denominational.'

The schools established under this Act were, then, pubiic parish or district schools, not belonging to or under the control of any particular denomination ; neither had any class of

persons, nor any one denomination-whether Protestant or Catholic-any rights or privileges in the government or control of the lands, that did not belong to every other class o.r denomination, in fact, to every other inhabitant of the parish or district ; neither had any one class of persons or denomination nor any individual, any right or privilege to have any peculiar religious doctrines or tenets exclusively taught, or taught at all, in any such school.

Such was our condition then. Under the school system which the government repealed the minority did not enjoy privileges by law, but enjoyed them simply through the good-will of the board of education or the inspectors of the province owing to The harmonious feelings which were in existence in the provinces. The judgment goes on :

But it is contended that the 60th section declaring ' that all schools conducted under the provisions of this Act shall he non-sectarian,' prejudicially affects the rights and privileges which the Roman Catholics, as a class, had in the parish schools at the time of the union. It cannot he denied that to the provincial legislature is confided the exclusive right of making laws in relation to education ; and that they, and they only, have the right to establish a general system of education, applicable to the whole province, and all classes and denominations, provided always they have due regard to the rights and privileges protected by section 93 of the British North America Act, 1867.

The judges of the Supreme Court of Canada had decided that wherever a class of persons in any province or territory, a class of persons coining into the union with privileges granted by the law of their province or territory, granted by the law of the land from which they came-that class of persons must be preserved in their privileges. It is self-evident and I believe that the opinion I am now giving can be upheld-that even if they are coming from a state of the American union where they enjoyed privileges conferred by the' law on that class of persons in that portion of territory, that class of persons would he entitled toclaim in Canada the privileges and therights they had before. Therefore today, we the minority-and I speak forthe Protestant minority, as I said before, as well as for the Catholic minority-we the minority coming in with school privileges in reference to separate schools or dissenting or denominational schools enjoy the privileges accorded to these minorities according to the British North America Act, as so nobly and richly and generously granted by the parliament of Great Britain, the parliament which as I say never grants half measures, when it grants a measure of justice. That parliament when, after years of consideration, it decided to grant emancipation to Ireland did not give a half measure, hut extended emancipation to the Catholics not only of Ireland! but of the whole empire, and, I might say. of all the world, and opened her ports

to all the Catholics of the whole universe to the great admiration of the Catholic world.

When England granted responsible government to the people of Canada, she granted it to the full extent with all its privileges, with full liberty, civil, political and religious. And what to-day is the brightest jewel in the flag of England-that England we admire so much and speak of with such enthusiasm ? Take from that flag the jewel of religious liberty and what is left in it more than in the similar emblem of any other nation. Religious liberty has been granted with full generosity by the British parliament and the British people. I refer not to men like the editors of the Toronto 'World' anad 'News.' I mean the British people ! That great people in giving religious liberty, did not take back with one hand -what they granted with the other, but gave it -with an open hand, with a generous heart and with best wishes for her subjects dispersed over the whole universe. Mr. Speaker, I claim that the question before us is merely a question of justice and right-undoubtedly right. And we know that the people in the minority in the districts of these new provinces, whether Catholic or Protestant, expect the same right and the same educational advantages as they possess to-day. We have there not only French Canadian Catholic people, but Scotch and Irish Catholics. We have also Germans of the Catholic faith who give good service to Canada and are equal to any other class of our people. We have the German Protestants, who are the equals of any other class in this country and who deserve to be protected in their rights. As I have said, we need in this country the virtues of every nation. We need in Canada, and particularly in the Northwest, a combination of the best people to build up that new country. To develop its resources the valour and activity of the Frenchman will not alone suffice. We require also the steady, dogged perseverance of the Scotchman who can follow his plough from sunrise to sunset, preparing the land for a crop which, repeated on thousands of farms, will make that vast country in fact the granary of the British empire. And these people coming to the Northwest will expect a continuance of the liberties and privileges which they find established there by law. I have spoken of the German people. I say that the German Protestant people are as jealous of their religious education and their separate schools as are the French or Irish or German Catholics. In the few weeks that I spent in the Northwest I devoted my time from morning till night to making myself acquainted with the people. I have met some of these Germans, both Protestants and Catholics, and that at a time when the discussion of this Bill was on the lip of every citizen of the Northwest Mr. TURGEON.

and these German people, both Protestants and Catholics, have said to me that they hoped that the new Bill would secure to them the separate schools which they have today in the Northwest. As I have said, the district in which the minority is Catholic to-day may have a Catholic majority in the future, or vice versa. My hon. friend from Beauharnois (Mr. Bergeron) whose countenance has drawn him towards me lately, has claimed that the educational clauses as they appear in this Bill do not give much to the Catholic minority of the new provinces.

I admit that if we were granted more we would not object to it. At the same time, I may tell my hon. friend that I am one of those who suffered for years in the struggle of the Catholic minority in New Brunswick to support separate schools. For a long time our schools -were practically closed, and we were paying, not only our own school tax without enjoying schools at all, but we were paying the public school tax, the Catholic population, especially on the north shore of New Brunswick, being among the poorest class of the people. I may be permitted to say to the hon. member for Beauharnois that perhaps if he had gone through the same experience he would better appreciate the liberty and the rights which are granted by this very Act. It grants to the Catholic minority in any district the right to have their separate schools supported by public money as well as the public schools in the same district or in other districts. It gives them the right to engage a Catholic teacher ; it also gives them the right to require the teacher-, dui'-ing that half hour, to teach the catechism or to give religious instruction to the Catholic children. That is not all we want, but we have there both the right to separate schools and the means to support them ; and for my part, Mr. Speaker, I value highly the fact alone that we have the means to suppoi't a school. In the interest of my own Catholic people I do not want to see a school that is not efficient, and a school cannot be efficient unless you have the means to make it so. If you do not give them the money to suppox't the school, what other privilege will be of any value to them ?

I think any one -who has given some attention to public instruction and to the education of his children will appreciate that fact. We want first of all the means. When the teacher has been engaged he is under a contract, and it is his duty to give to the children a religious education during that half hour. He has also the duty, dux'ing the rest of the day, of supervising the education of the Catholic children in the classes, and this is a point in which my hon. friend from Beauharnois is equally interested with myself. The influence of the teacher is there all day long, his guardianship is there all the time that the children are receiving education in other branches as well as in religion ; the child is receiving lessons

in geography, lessons in arithmetic, along with his catechism and his holy scripture. When we have the young well educated in Christian morals and doctrine, as well as in secular matters, we can rely on the future of the country. When the Catholic minority come to the parliament of Canada and ask them to favour the sacred traditions of the Catholic people for religious instruction to a certain extent, they ask for it in the name of their conscience, but they ask for it also for the benefit of Canadian society. The more religious instruction you give to the child the better citizen you make of him. And we want in this country good citizens, people who will not live in idleness ; we want the child, along with his secular education, to receive a good moral tuition and a good Christian tuition. As long as we'ask for that in the name of conscience, why, in the name of the British flag, should you not give it to us ? We are asking nothing from the Protestant majority alongside of us, we are only asking for the right to use our own money in order to educate our own children, so that they may become true Canadian citizens. We know from experience that other denominations do not hold the same view with regard to the necessity of religious instruction in the schools, and we do not object to that, yet this Bill gives to the Protestant majority and the Protestant minority the same privilege of giving religious instruction to their children during the half hour. I know there is scarcely a Christian mother in -the western provinces who does .not wish her child to receive a Christian education. I met the Christian mother in the Northwest. She spoke to me her love of her children and her devotion to their welfare and happiness. She spoke to me of her attachment to the religious education of her children, and her desire that they should receive a good moral education at the same time, in order that they might grow up to be honest and useful citizens. We must remember that civilization carries with it some dangers which only a Christian education can counteract, and without such Christian education the result will be disastrous, not only to the family, but to society in Canada.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I think I have established in a most irrefutable manner that the people who go into the Northwest provinces have a right to enjoy the same privileges that they received at home. I regret as much as does the member for Beauhar-nois that our Catholic people are not accorded still greater privileges than will be given them under this law. But the constitution allows us to grant only what we now possess, and what we hold now we are bound to guarantee by this Autonomy Bill, it is not a question of political power for this parliament, it is a question of granting school privileges to the minority in the new provinces. In 1S75, when the parliament of

Canada decided unanimously to give separate schools to the people of the Northwest, the parliament had power to make them lasting. In 1875, when the parliament of Canada gave to ' that class of persons,' to use the language of the judgment of the Supreme Court of New Brunswick, rights and privileges in regard to educational matters in the Northwest Territories, it gave them for ever. To-day this parliament is not confronted with a question of whether or not it has power to do a certain thing ; it is confronted with a simple duty to preserve the rights established by the Act of 1875. Parliament had the power at that time, as Mr. Blake plainly stated. Mr. Blake's language hasi already been quoted in this House, but I may be permitted to read it again :

The task which the ministry had set for itself was the most important it was possible to conceive. To found primary institutions under which we hope to see hundreds of thousands, and the more sanguine of us think, millions of men and families settled and flourishing, was one of the noblest undertakings that could be entered upon by any legislative body, and it was no small indication of the power and true position of this Dominion that parliament should be engaged to-day in that important task. He agreed with the hon. member for Kingston (Sir John A. Macdonald) that the task was one that required time, consideration and deliberation, and they must take care that no false steps were made in such a work. He did not agree with that right hon. gentleman that the government ought to repeal his errors. The right hon. gentleman had tried the institutions for the Northwest Territories which he now asked the House to frame, and for the same reason as he had given to-day- that it would be better for the Dominion government to keep matters in their own hands and decide what was best for the future. He (Mr. Blake) believed that it was essential to our obtaining a large immigration to the Northwest that we should tell the people beforehand what those rights were to be in the country in which we invited them to settle.

He regarded it as essential, under the circumstances of the country, and in view of the deliberation during the last few days, that a general principle should be laid down in the Bill with respect to public instruction. He did believe that we ought not to introduce into that territory the heart burnings and diflflculties with which certain other portions of the Dominion and other countries had been afflicted. It seemed to him, having regard to the fact that, as far as we could expect at present, the general character of that population would be somewhat analogous to the population of Ontario, that there should be some provision in the constitution by which they should have conferred upon them the same rights and privileges in regard to religious instruction as those possessed by the people of the province of Ontario. The principles of local self-government and the settling of the question of public instruction seemed to him ought to be the cardinal principles of the measure.

At that time it was within the power of the Dominion parliament to grant or not to

Topic:   APEJI. 7, 1905
Permalink

April 7, 1905