May 2, 1905

LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of Inland Revenue)

Liberal

Mr. BRODEUR.

I do not say that these privileges have been absolutely denied. At the same time, in certain parts of the Northwest, they have been denied. Perhaps in the Northwest they have not gone so far as to destroy entirely the separate schools, but they have certainly to a large extent decreased the privileges which the minority enjoy with regard to separate schools.

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

They did not have any privileges of separate schools, therefore that privilege has not been taken from them.

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of Inland Revenue)

Liberal

Mr. BRODEUR.

My hon. friend (Mr. Sproule) is entirely mistaken, they had privileges with regard to separate schools. Is it not perfectly clear that they had voluntary schools in the Northwest at that time ?

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
CON
LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of Inland Revenue)

Liberal

Mr. BRODEUR.

Were not these schools, where Catholics, controlled by the Catholics, and where Protestants controlled by the Protestants ? And let me put this question, to my friend : Is it not true that the authority then exercising rights of sovereignty in the Northwest Territories, the Hudson Bay Company, was giving a share of money to these schools whether Catholic or Protestant ?

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

May I remind the hon. gentleman (Mr. Brodeur) that what the peo-

pie laad were voluntary schools, and that the decision of the Privy Council with regard to the Manitoba case was that these people were not to be denied any right which they had in the church schools, vol-untaxy schools. And that is clear, for they could have those schools to-day.

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of Inland Revenue)

Liberal

Mr. BRODEUR.

There is one fact which cannot be disputed,-that the Catholics had their schools which they controlled, and the Protestants had their 'schools which they controlled. The people in the west were afraid that these rights would be taken away from them, and so they showed hesitation in accepting the terms of union. At last there was a promise made by the imperial government and by the Canadian government, and by Lord Strathcona, who had been sent out there to settle the difficulty, that these rights and privileges would be continued ;-that is to say, Catholics would have the right to their schools and Protestants to their schools. My hon. friend (.or. Sproule) will not deny, I suppose, that the delegates who came from the west were recognized by the Dominion government. In fact, the cable which was sent by Sir John Young, to Lord Granville, the Secretary of State for the colonies, recognizes them as such ; and more than that, I am informed that the expenses of these delegates on their journey to Ottawa were paid by the Canadian government. So, Mr. Speaker, there was a formal agreement, a formal compact by which these rights and privileges, should continue to be exercised by the Protestants and Catholics of the Northwest. There is no doubt about that. And, now that we are called upon to give autonomy to the Northwest Territories, some elements in this country would have the government and parliament not carry out the promise which was made to the minority by the imperial government, by the Canadian government and by Lord Strathcona. Sir, the government of this country will not commit such an injustice ; we will not go back on the promise which was made in 1809-70. The government of this country will give the minority their rights which were guaranteed to them by the promise then made, the rights which they enjoy under the constitution.

While on the subject of compacts, and before dealing with the constitutional aspect of the question, I would like to say a word or two with regard to the compact with the other provinces. I noticed a few days ago in the Toronto ' News,' a statement which has been made time and again in the course of this controversy. The Toronto ' News ' is a newspaper of great importance, but one which, perhaps, in this agitation, has not done its duty to the country as it should have done. The Toronto ' News ' has said that the compact with regard to separate schools was one which affected only the provinces of Quebec and Ontario ancf not the others. Mr. Speaker, I am here to as-Mr. SPROULE.

sert that there was a compact with regard to separate schools not only in connection with Ontario and Quebec but in connection with the other provinces which formed the union or might later enter the union. Now, what is the history of section 93 of the British North America Act, 1867 ? There was a conference at Quebec in 1864, attended by representatives of Upper Canada, Lower Canada, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland. After discussing the question of confederation for several days, the delegates came to the conclusion that the educational laws should be under the control of the legislatures of the several provinces, saving the rights and privileges which the minority in Upper and Lower Canada might enjoy. It is true that the compact then applied only to those two provinces, it is true that the compact then simply embraced Quebec and Ontario. But I am going to show, and I am going to put before this House conclusive evidence, that the compact later on was extended to all the provinces, not only to those which had entered into confederation, but to those which would come in later on. What have we then ? Immediately after the Quebec conference, Mr. Galt, then representing the Protestant minority of Quebec, made a speech in Sherbrooke in which he said :

It is clear that in confiding the general subject of education to the local legislatures, it is absolutely necessary that it should be accompanied with such restrictions as shall prevent injustice in any respect from, being done to the minority.

Now this applied to Lower Canada, but it also applied and with equal force to Upper Canada and the other provinces.

The same privileges belong to the one of right here as belong to the other of right elsewhere. There could not be greater injustice to a population than to compel them to have their children educated in a manner contrary to their own religious belief.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we find this gentleman representing the Protestant minority of Quebec, saying that the compact should* not only cover the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, but should cover also the other provinces, and especially the provinces of New Bruns-to a population than to compel them to have wick and Nova Scotia. But the negotiations did not stop there, there was something more. What was done! After the conference at Quebec, the negotiations went to London, they had a conference in Loudon, and my hon. friend will find at page 98 of Pope's Confederation Documents, that the following provinces were represented in London : Quebec, Ontario, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. They discussed the question of confederation, and the way in which the Bill which was to be introduced into the imperial parliament should be drafted. What occurred then ? When they came to discuss section 43 of the Quebec conference, we find

that Mr. Galt moved an amendment, which Is to be found in the same book at page 112 ; we And this amendment moved, not by a Catholic, but by the representative Protestant of the minority of Quebec :

And in any province where a system of separate or dissentient schools by law obtains, or where the local legislature may hereafter adopt

Notice that, Mr. Speaker, not in the provinces of Quebec and Ontario alone, as we liave so often heard it declared in this House and outside.

Where a system of separate or dissentient schools by law. obtains, or where the local legislature may hereafter adopt a system of separate or dissentient schools, an appeal shall lie to the Governor in Council of the general government from, the Acts and decisions of the local authorities which may affect the rights or privileges of the Protestant or Catholic minority in the matter of education. And the general parliament shall have power in the last resort to legislate on the subject.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we find in the same book and on the same page a facsimile of the motion which was made by Mr. Galt, in the handwriting of Mr. Galt, which motion proves that Mr. Galt wanted the compact with regard to separate schools extended so as to apply not only to Quebec and Ontario, but to all the provinces, not only to the provinces which were then in existence, not only to Quebec, Ontario, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, but also to those provinces which might come in later and form part of the confederation. What then happened, Mr. Speaker ? We are told that the compact existed only between Quebec aud Ontario. Well, Sir, we find in the handwriting of Sir .Tohn A. Macdonald, in the same facsimile to which I have just alluded, that there was a vote taken on the question whether these powers with regard to separate schools should be extended to all the provinces, that is to Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and others which might come in ; there was a vote taken, and we find the result stated in the handwriting of Sir John A. Macdonald, a document which was found among his papers after his death, by his then secretary, Mr. Joseph Pope, and this is how it reads :

Nova Scotia votes, yes ; New Brunswick votes, yes ; Canada votes, yes.

So, Mr. Speaker, the agreement did not cover only the two provinces but it covered all the provinces which then entered into the union, and the provinces which should be created in the future.

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROXJLE.

Might I ask the hon. member this question ? These were the delegates who went home after the resolutions were submitted to the parliament here and accepted by that parliament, and after the most emphatic assurance was given by the Attorney General of Canada here that

the delegates would bring back no Bill but one which was exactly in aceord with the resolutions. Then that amendment was made in England, but it was not assented to by the parliament of Canada except in so far as the representatives of those provinces were satisfied and assented to it.

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of Inland Revenue)

Liberal

Mr. BBODEUR.

Well, Mr. Speaker, 1 am sorry to see that my hon. friend wishes to deny this agreement. This is an important question, one to which I am sure he has given much attention, and X am surprised to hear him express the opinion that those who made that agreement in England were not authorized to do so. Will he say for one moment that Sir Charles Tupper was not authorized to speak for his province of Nova Scotia ? Will he say that Sir Samuel Leonard Tilley did not represent his province of New Brunswick, and was not authorized to do what he did on that occasion ? Will he say that Sir John A. Macdonald. that Sir George Etienne Cartier, were in error, and did not carry out the promises which they made to this country

Mr. SPROUIjE. I will say this, if the hon. gentleman will allow me to say it. that when the question arose in the Canadian parli-ment as to whether the Bill, after it had passed the imperial parliament, should or should not be submitted to tbe Canadian parliament, an amendment was moved tliat it should be submitted, and it was claimed as a reason for that amendment that laws were often brought back from tbe Imperial parliament that (lid not exactly accord with the resolutions that were made and carried by the Canadian parliament, and that therefore it was necessary to review these laws and ascertain whether they were exactly in accord with the resolutions. In opposition to that amendment Sir George E. Cartier was the one who spoke on behalf of the government, and declared that he would bring back no law but one which was exactly the same as the resolutions.

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of Inland Revenue)

Liberal

Mr. BRODEUR.

I think my hon. friend is entirely mistaken as to that. He reminds me of something which I have read somewhere. that it was perfectly understood between Mr. Galt. Sir George E. Cartier and Sir John A. Macdonald that when they went to England they would see that the Protestant minority in Quebec was absolutely protected. and would receive special power to dispose of their money and control the administration of their schools. I think my hon. friend must remember that. Therefore it was not understood that those Quebec resolutions should he embodied in a law passed in England in precisely the same form as they were passed here. No, there was a conference de novo, the delegates of each province united together, discussed the question and they came to the conclusion, a conclusion which cannot be denied, that the compact in regard to separate schools should

apply not only to both Canadas but to all ol' the provinces

the provinces which were' then entering confederation as well as the provinces which would come later on into the confederation.

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

May I ask the hon. gentleman a question? Is he making the point that there is something in this compact which was not embodied in the British North America Act, or does he conceive that everything in this compact made at London was embodied in the British North America Act? What is the point?

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of Inland Revenue)

Liberal

Mr. BRODEUR.

I have not discussed the Bi'itish North America Act so far. I have simply been speaking of the compact which was existing and answering the assertion that has been made almost every day in some of the papers that the compact was only in regard to Quebec and Ontario and did not affect the other provinces.

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

What I would like to know is if the hon. gentleman contends that in this compact to which he has just referred and which was made in London, there is anything which was not embodied in the British North America Act ?

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
LIB
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

There is not ?

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
LIB
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

Well then you have every thing in the British North America Act.

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of Inland Revenue)

Liberal

Mr. BRODEUR.

I do not think my hon. friend has understood exactly. It is probably my fault; it is probably my mistake; I speak so badly that perhaps I have been misunderstood by my hon. friend. The point which I wanted to make is this, that it has been asserted time and again in the papers, for instance in the Toronto ' News ' of the 1st April, that the compact had reference purely and simply to both Canadas. That has been asserted almost every day. I wanted to prove by the book which I have just quoted and by the motion which was made by Sir Alexander Galt and which was assented to by the delegates from Nova Scotia and New Brunswick that a system of separate schools should not only be maintained in the provinces which were then entering the union, but that a system of separate schools should be maintained that was later on, even after confederation, embodied in the laws and that future provinces in consequence should be bound also to maintain a system of separate schools whether they should establish these separate schools at the union or whether they should establish them later on. That has been embodied in the British North America Act and that is the reason why I am surprised that papers that want Mr. BRODEUR.

to inflame public opinion in all parts of the country are always repeating the story that the compact was simply in regard to the two provinces. I have proved that the compact affected all the provinces in the Dominion.

Now, before I discuss the constitutional question my hon. friend, the leader of the opposition, will probably forgive me if I discuss for a moment or two the amendment which he has moved and which we have now to consider. * I have read this amendment over several times and I have had some difficulty in making up my mind as to its exact meaning. Perhaps it is my mistake. I am sure it is my mistake, because my hon. friend certainly wanted to put before the House a concrete motion embodying perfectly his views and ideas. I will read the amendment again in order to find out whether, with the help of my hon. friend, I will be able to understand exactly its meaning. It says :

Upon the establishment of a province in the Northwest Territories of Canada, as proposed by Bill (No. 69), the legislature of such province-

Here are the words which I do not understand exactly.

subject to and in accordance with the provisions of the British North America Acts, 1867 to 1886, is entitled to and should enjoy full powers of provincial self-government, including power to exclusively make laws in relation to education.

I understand perfectly well the latter part, that the provincial legislature shall have the right, if this amendment carries, to exclusively make laws in relation to education. Does it mean, however, Mr. Speaker, that these laws shall be subject to section 93 of the British North America Act? Does it mean that the provincial legislature shall have the right to exclusively make laws in regard to education, and that at the same time these laws should be submitted to the federal parliament control under section 93 of the British North America Act? That is the point which I have not been able to understand. It is true, as I have said, that my hon. friend is very clear in the latter part of his amendment, but he does not seem to be so clear in the qualification which he gives to these powers. What does he mean by ' subject to and in accordance with the provisions of the British North America Act'? Does he mean that section 93 will apply or does he mean that section 93 shall not apply as far as education is concerned? I would like to put to him a question to know exactly whether I understand the exact meaning of his amendment. Suppose that his amendment should carry, suppose the legislature of the province of Saskatchewan should pass a law creating separate schools-could this legislature vary, or decrease, or abolish these separate schools? I do not know

whether my hon. friend understands the question I have just put ?

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

Does my hon. friend desire an answer ?

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink
LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of Inland Revenue)

Liberal

Mr. BRODEUR.

Yes. The question which I want to ask is this : Suppose the

legislature of Saskatchewan to-morrow should pass a law establishing separate schools-I am supposing that this motion carries and that the legislature, acting upon it, will pass a law to-morrow establishing separate schools-would the legislature be entitled afterwards to abolish those separate schools, or to repeal the law ?

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.
Permalink

May 2, 1905