June 4, 1908

LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of Marine and Fisheries)

Liberal

Hon. L. P. BRODEUR (Minister of Marine and Fisheries).

With regard to the statement concerning the 'Champlain,' I may be permitted to explain that some days ago we were asked to have the steamer make a trip from Murray bay to Baie St. Paul. We decided that there was no objection to that, provided that a certain deposit were made, in accordance with the rules of the department, and that a charge of I think 5 cents per mile was made to each passenger. I was surprised to hear that somebody was refused admission, because the trip was to be for every person who wished to take it.

I may say that after the statement was made in the House some days ago, I made inquiries as to whether or not any persons were refused admission, and the report made to me was to the effect that no person was refused admission. In view of the statement made by my hon. friend to-day,

I would ask him to be kind enough to give me the names of those who have complained in order that I may investigate the matter more fully.

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   FEDERAL INTERFERENCE IN PROVINCIAL ELECTIONS.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

I have not the names. The name of my informant, however. I may give to the minister. It is Mr. Rodolphe Forget, the member for Charlevoix.

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   FEDERAL INTERFERENCE IN PROVINCIAL ELECTIONS.
Permalink
LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of Marine and Fisheries)

Liberal

Mr. BRODEUR.

The statement made by the agents at Quebec is that no person was refused admission. As to the other statement. that the * Champlain ' refused one morning to call at Ste. Ironoe. I may say that the wharf there is very hard to make in bad weather, and on that dm* the steamer was unable to go to the wharf, which is the reason it did not call. I do not know whether there was a meeting or not, but it is mentioned in the timetable that if that wharf cannot be made on any day oil account of bad weather, it will not be made. There was no intention on the part of the officers of the boat to prevent any person from going on board.

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   FEDERAL INTERFERENCE IN PROVINCIAL ELECTIONS.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

I give the facts exactly as they were given to me by the gentleman mentioned. who is my informant as to what took place on both occasions.

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   FEDERAL INTERFERENCE IN PROVINCIAL ELECTIONS.
Permalink

THE MILITIA CAMPS.

CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

I would like to ask the Minister of Militia whether it is the intention to hold militia camps in June this year.

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   THE MILITIA CAMPS.
Permalink
?

Hon. W. S.@

I observed in ' Hansard ' the report of my hon. friend's question yesterday, and I asked the adjutant general to send me a memorandum this morning as to the present situation with regard to the camps. I am sorry to say I have not yet received that memorandum. However, I may say that it is our intention to hold the camps as usual. In one case, I forget which, the local militia desired to have a postponement, which of course was agreed to, because it is the rule to consult the convenience of the different regiments in the matter of holding the camps. In another case, that of Kingston, it was discovered that the water supply was doubtful, and therefore a postponement of that camp was ordered until we are thoroughly satisfied as to the condition of the water supply. With regard to another camp, that of Laprairie, a report has been received from the officer commanding in the province of Quebec that the ground at that place is largely covered with water owing to the fact that the St. Lawrence river is unusually high, and that it would be impossible to hold a camp there in the very near future ; so that there is a postponement there. Otherwise, so far as I know, there has been no postponement.

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   THE MILITIA CAMPS.
Permalink
CON

Alexander Ferguson MacLaren

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MacLAREN.

Can the minster say whether the Goderich camp on the lGth of June is likely to go on?

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   THE MILITIA CAMPS.
Permalink
LIB

Frederick William Borden (Minister of Militia and Defence)

Liberal

Sir FREDERICK BORDEN.

So far as I know, it is. I know nothing to the contrary.

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   THE MILITIA CAMPS.
Permalink
CON

Edward Arthur Lancaster

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LANCASTER.

Is the large camp at Niagara likely to go on?

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   THE MILITIA CAMPS.
Permalink
LIB

Frederick William Borden (Minister of Militia and Defence)

Liberal

Sir FREDERICK BORDEN.

I have given all the information I have at present.

I hope to have the report of the adjutant general later in the day, and will give it to the House.

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   THE MILITIA CAMPS.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

Perhaps the minister will be good enough then to give fuller information. Can he inform the House what the definite arrangements are as to the assembling of any considerable body of the militia at Quebec in July?

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   THE MILITIA CAMPS.
Permalink
LIB

Frederick William Borden (Minister of Militia and Defence)

Liberal

Sir FREDERICK BORDEN.

I cannot give that information to-day; but arrangements are being made by General Otter with a view to having a very considerable number, a sufficient number of troops attend at Quebec and take part in the proceedings of the tercentenary celebration. I think I can make a definite announcement on Monday.

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   THE MILITIA CAMPS.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   THE MILITIA CAMPS.
Permalink

REPRESENTATION OF THE MARITIME PROVINCES.

CON

John Waterhouse Daniel

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. J. W. DANIEL (St. John city).

Before you leave the chair, Mr. Speaker, to go into Committee of Supply, I wish to bring up the subject which I think of importance, more especially to the people of the maritime provinces. I refer to the subject of representation in the House of Commons. In speaking on this matter, I wish to refer more especially to the position in which the maritime provinces are to-day with regard to their representation in this House. This is a matter which has been up before this parliament on two or three occasions already. On each of these occasions it was very ably debated, but so far these debates have Dot been productive of a decision. The more I have looked into the matter, the more convinced I have become that grave injustice has been done the maritime provinces by the amendments which have been made to the original British North America Act, by reason of which the plan on which confederation was arranged was changed without the people of those provinces having been consulted or having had any opportunity to object. I might remind the House that before confederation this matter was up before the four provinces for a long time. It was discussed on all the public platforms of the country and was the basis on which those, both in favour of and opposed to the proposed plan of confederation, presented their views to the public. That controversy resulted in a certain charter or bond of union being adopted, but that bond has since been changed on two or three occasions without any opportunity having been given the maritime provinces either to object or assent to those changes. As a consequence the time has arrived when the people of those provinces are beginning to realize the position in which they now find themselves. They begin to realize that they are no longer under the bond of union under which they originally entered confederation. The terms of that bond having been changed, the maritime provinces are now liable to a decrease in their representation to which they would not have been liable had those changes not been made. Consequently they feel that they have been deceived and that they are suffering, through no fault or their own, from a grievance which this parliament should remove by seeing that the wrong is no longer permitted to exist. The matter is a serious one. There is no doubt that the feeling of unrest now prevailing will increase rather than diminish and finally develop into an agitation, the end of which uo one can possibly foresee.

As regards the campaign which resulted in our adoption of the British North America Act, I have taken some pains to look up that part of it relating to the province

of New Brunswick, and I find that at that time the question concerning which the greatest fighting took place was the question of representation in the House of Commons. It was on that question that the anti-eonifederates founded their strongest arguments and it was concerning it that the fierciest debating took place. In that connection I may say that the hon. the Minister of Justice (Mr. Aylesworth) in a speech last session on this matter, rather took too much for granted when he said that the Quebec scheme had been adopted by the people of the maritime provinces. I think he hardly put that matter in an exactly fair position, and in order to be exact, I shall quote the words he used :

If we are, the moment the balance of representation, as determined by population shifts-if we are, the moment the representation of any particular province is consequently reduced, to have from that particular province a claim for the readjustment of the original terms of union, the principle of representation by population, which was solemnly adopted by the Quebec conference, is at once set aside. It is impossible that the terms of the union can be in that respect retained when upon such special and altogether unusual and unique circumstance, such as I have sought to describe, in the distant future with regard to Prince Edward Island, you are to have the whole terms of the Confederation Act set at nought and have everything left to further negotiation and determination between the parties. ,

I have two objections to make to that statement. The first is that the Quebec scheme was not adopted by our people as stated. The second is that in making our appeal for a readjustment of the original terms of the union, we say that these terms have not been acted up to and that on that ground we have the right to claim just treatment. No doubt the speech of the hon. minister was a very able one, but in my opinion he argued the case rather as a lawyer than a legislator ; and of course, with the law as it stands, we would have to go out of court. Both the Supreme Court and the Privy Council have given adverse decisions, but they gave them based on those amendments which were made to the original charter or bond of agreement and therefore did not adjuciate the case on its merits. With regard to the Quebec scheme, so far as the people of New Brunswick are concerned, the 'scheme was laid before the electors of that province in 1865 and was voted down by a very large majority. Afterwards in 1866, as II see by the ' Morning Telegraph ' of the 20th of March of that year, Mr. Smith, the Auditor General of the day-subsequently I believe the Hon. Albert J. Smith, Minister of Marine and Fisheries-said he would not vote for any scheme which involved the possibility of the interests of New Brunswick being swamped by the rest of Canada. On

the 22nd of that month the same hon. gentleman said :

I will go down in the ship rather than consent to representation by population as contained in the Quebec scheme, but I have no objection to supporting it, provided there is a check furnished in the upper House or otherwise which will serve to protect the interests of New Brunswick.

Subsequently in its report of a public meeting held in the city of St. John, when there was a general election pending and when this subject was of course the principal one under discussion, the 1 Morning Telegraph,' in its issue of the 21st of April, said :

The Hon. Peter Mitchell at last night's public meeting said the government would not insist on the Quebec scheme of confederation, they would accept such improvements as could be had, and would be willing to allow delegates chosen from both political parties, to go as delegates to the British government to urge such changes and alterations as might meet with the views of the maritime provinces.

All these statements, taken in connection with the fact that the Quebec scheme, as such, was absolutely defeated at the polls, go to show that the people of New Brunswick, at all events, did not accept the Quebec scheme as a basis under which they would join the confederation. The legislature of New Brunswick, on June 26, following, had the suggestion which Hon. Peter Mitchell had made, and which I have just read and passed the following resolution :

Resolved, that an humble address be presented to His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor praying that His Excellency will be pleased to appoint delegates to unite with delegates from the other provinces in arranging with the Imperial government for the union of British North America

[DOT]

Not on the Quebec scheme, but

-upon such terms as will secure the just rights and interests of New Brunswick accompanied with provision for the immediate construction of the Intercolonial Railway. Each province to have an equal voice in such delegation. Upper and Lower Canada to be considered as separate provinces.

I believe that an almost identical resolution was passed by the province of Nova Scotia, with the exception that the Nova Scotia resolution made no reference to the immediate construction of the Intercolonial Railway. Now, the result of all this was the meeting of delegates at London in the conference which is known as the London conference. At that conference certain terms of union were drafted which were afterwards crystallized into law in the form of the British North America Act of 1867.

I do not wish to endeavour to make anything of a legal argument, but it will be necessary for me to refer to one or two sections of the British North America Act

province of Quebec in the year 1871. Our own publications showed that the area of the province of Quebec, as understood and printed on the maps, authorized and acknowledged as being correct, was bounded on the north by the height of land to which I have alluded. The result of this added territory must certainly, without the shadow of a doubt, have a very serious effect upon the representation of this country. It must necessarily enlarge the unit of representation. What is the country that has been added to the province of Quebec ? It is this large country about which we heard a great deal at the time the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Bill was before this House. We were told that we had mountains of information with regard to that country. I dio not know how much information there really was, but I do understand that the information that is gradually coming to the front, as explorers and surveyors are making their way through there, leads us to believe that a large part of it will be capable of supporting a large population and that there is a large quantity of good agricultural land in it. We also know that from the Abitibi region we have had reports of large mineral wealth, and it is also right that we should take into consideration the fact that in the near future the addition of this enormous area, will have a very decided effect upon the unit of representation. I think that the area of Quebec, by the census of 1871, was 193,555 square miles, and that by the addition to the area which was made by the Act passed in 1898 it became a region of over 351,000 square miles. If, as some state, this country is sterile, what justification have this government and this parliament to go through that enormous area and spend millions and millions of money to build a railway ? I take it that was not the idea of those who devised and carried out the building of this railway, that it was not thought that it was a sterile country but that it was a country worth opening up, developing an,di anaking the home of a' large population. What will be the result if that expectation is realized? All we can look forward to is that the unit of representation which is now about 25,000 will in the comparatively near future increase to as much as 50,000 or 60,000- or even more. What will be the result of that ? The result will be that Prince Edward Island would have one representative and perhaps none at all. and Nova Scotia and New Brunswick might have one, two or three ; practically we would be reduced to the condition of taxation without representation, and I think I need hardly remind you that the people of this country will not submit to such a position ; that is to be free to subscribe to all the expenditure that is necessary to build the public works of the Dominion and support the government of the1' country, but not to be free to have a word to say as to how these public works 1 Mr. DANIEL.

are to be built or as to how this expenditure is to be met. The Minister of Justice, in his speech last year, argued that because New Brunswick and Nova Scotia did not formally protest when their representation was reduced, therefore, they considered that they were being treated according to the bond. At page 2168 of * Hansard ' he stated :

During these years, if there had been foundation for it in the understanding of those who entered the union, there is little doubt that protest and objection would then have been taken, but there was none.

I submit that the inference that the Minister of Justice drew in that statement is not fair or correct, and that the people of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick had no reason whatever to suppose that if they had made such a protest it would have been heeded. As a proof of that statement I might remind the House that in 1905, New Brunswick did protest against the new provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan being put into the British North America Act so that the Act would apply to them in the same way as if they had been part olf the original confederation. Was that protest heeded ? No, Sir, no result followed from that protest at all, no heed was given to it and the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan were placed under the British North America Act as though they had been part of the original confederation.

Now, Sir, the matter of this New Brunswick protest is a somewhat important -matter and I am going to bring it to the notice of the House. The matter was considered so important that it was referred to in the speech from the Throne and I am going to read the resolution which was brought in by the then premier, Mr. Tweedie, who is now the governor of the province, and I am going to read a few of the remarks which were made by those -who spoke on that occasion. I will first give the resolution as it appears in the New Brunswick assembly debates of 1905. The resolution is as follows :

Whereas the Judicial Committee of the Provincial Council in its recent decision on the appeal in the representation ease, left undecided the question whether in computing the population of Canada, under subsection 4 of section 51 of the British North America Act the population of the territories should be included, and

Whereas, in the Imperial order in council providing for the admission of British Columbia as a province of Canada, and by the statute which created the province of Manitoba it was provided that the British North America Act, 1867, should apply to them, as if they had formed part of the confederacy as originally constituted, whereby the contention of the government of this province that in construing subsection 4 of section 51 of said Act the words ' population of Canada ' mean the population of the four original provinces was greatly and justly prejudiced, and

JlTtfE 4, 1908

Whereas, the northern boundary of the province of Quebec at confederation was shown on the authorized maps, and was understood, and recognized to be the height of land between the waters flowing into the River St. Lawrence, and those flowing into Hudson bay, and

Whereas, the parliament of Canada did by the Act 61 Vic., chapter 3, enlarge the limits of the said province of Quebec by the addition to it of a large area to the northward (the area at that time being 193,355 square miles), thereby increasing the territory of said province to 351,873 square miles, an increase of 158,518 square miles, and

Whereas such Act was passed under the authority of the imperial statute, being the British North America Act, 1871, which declares that the parliament of Canada may from time to time, with the consent of the legislature of any province, increase, diminish or otherwise alter the limits of such province, upon such terms and conditions as may be agreed to by the said legislature and may, with the like consent, make provision respecting the effect and operation of any such increase or diminution or alteration of territory in relation to any province affected thereby, therefore it is resolved,

1st. That in the opinion of this House, the earnest attention of the government of Cam ada should be drawn to the effect of said order in council, and statute respectively, relat-[DOT] ing to the admission to the union of British Columbia and Manitoba, and it should be requested to take such action as may be necessary in order to restore the four original provinces to the position in which they would have been, but for order in council and legislation passed subsequently to the British North America Act, 1867, in respect to which such provinces were not consulted, and to which they were not parties.

2nd. That in the Act for the creation of the new provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan it should not be provided that the British North America Act shall supply to them as if they were in the union originally and the rights of the original provinces as to representation should not be affected by the creation of such new provinces.

3rd. That in justice to the other provinces, particularly New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island, which have no opportunity for enlargement of their areas, it should have been provided, and should now be provided that for the purposes of representation the boundaries of the province of Quebec, the population of which is the basis of representation, should be deemed to be as they were at the time of confederation, ot that some just and equitable provision should be made to save the other original provinces, and also Prince Edward Island, from loss of representation; and further.

Resolved, that a copv of the foregoing resolution signed bv the Clerk of this House, be forwarded to the 'Secretary of State, with the request that the same be laid before His Excellency the Governor Geneial, and that a copy be also forwarded to the Right Hon. Sii Wilfrid Laurier.

There was a protest entered by a province of this Dominion against the continuance of this injustice to the maritime provinces and yet notwithstanding the opinion of the Minister of Justice that protest was unheeded and the grievance unredressed.

I may say that the Hon. Mr. Tweedie on that occasion made a very strong speech in support of the motion and he referred among other things to the lack of interest in provincial matters which is sometimes taken by former members of the local legislatures who happen to be transferred to the higher sphere of the Dominion parliament. He said :

I feel that this is a question which should be discussed by the members on both sides of the House, in the fullest manner and with the single eye to the interests of the province. It is worthy of note that sometimes gentlemen who are very heartily in favour of provincial rights when members of the provincial legislature, become strangely indifferent to them, when they go to Ottawa. I remember that Messrs. Fielding and Blair were very prominent in urging the rights of the maritime provinces at Quebec conference, in 1887, but when they got to the larger field they apparently forgot that they were pledged to support these interests.

Further he said :

At the time of confederation Quebec had certain well defined boundaries. According to the census of 1871 it had an area of 193,555 square miles. Quebec is the province by which the representation of the other provinces is regulated. In 1898 an Act was passed which extended the boundaries of Quebec so that it contained 351,000 square miles in addition of 158,000 square miles to its territory. This territorv thus added to Quebec is that through which the Grand Trunk Pacific will pass and which we may expect to become populous in the future. The result will be to diminish our representation in a way never contemplated by the British North America Act.

During the debate the then Attorney General of New Brunswick, now the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Pugsley), who repre-| sented the province before the Supreme | Court and also before the Privy Council in the matter, supported the resolution strongly and used this language :

I have never entertained the slightest doubt that the fathers of confederation in framing their scheme of representation intended that it should be confined to the four original provinces of Canada, and that if other provinces were admitted it should be on terms. In that view I was fortified by the statement of one of the greatest statesmen of Canada, who was himself one of the fathers of confederation, and .who took a leading part in bringing it about. I refer to the late Sir John A. Macdonald who in his report of the 29th December, 1870, on the admission of the Northwest Territory, said :

' The general purview of the British North America Act of 1867 seems to be sufficient to the four provinces, Upper and Lower Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, originally forming the Dominion.

Again lie said :

When British Columbia was admitted into the union it was stipulated that her representation should be increased under the terms of the British North America Act, and that this Act should apply as if she had been one of the original provinces of confederation, the same thing was done with respect to Manitoba. Now what has been the effect of this? It is that you must construe the British North America Act as if these provinces had been in the union in 1867.

I call the attention of the House to these words of the Minister of Public Works :

If that is so. the compact of confederation has been violated by legislation and by order in council without our being consulted. Surely the authorities at Ottawa should see that this wrong is remedied.

If the population of the territories and of British Columbia had been excluded, New Brunswick would not have lost a representative.

Later during the debate Mr. Pugsley said:

Some may say it will be difficult to have the wrong done us righted, but I think that it can be. I have faith in sense of justice of those administering the affairs of the Dominion.

Later on, in concluding his speech, he said :

I can only repeat what I said yesterday that the province of New Brunswick entered into confederation with a Quebec with certain defined boundaries, and that it was never contemplated that a Quebec should be created double the size of the original province. Yet Quebec is the pivotal province upon which the representation of this province depends. I feel that they have done us a great wrong, yet I do not despair but that when the matter is brought to the notice of government and the parliament, some steps will be taken to see that this injustice is not continued.

These are the words of the Attorney General of the province of New Brunswick at that time, and now the hon. gentleman sits in this House as Minister of Public Works, and has an opportunity, which I hope he will put Into effect, of urging these views for adoption by the government oif which he is a member. He has the whole matter thoroughly well grounded In his mind, and he is now in a position, I think, to force these views on this government with some hope of ultimate success. He knows as well as I do that this matter is growing in intensity of interest in the maritime provinces, and that unless it is satisfactorily adjudicated upon at an early day there1wiil come a time when it will probably be more difficult of satisfactory adjustment. In the assembly of New Brunswick there were no two opinions on either side of the House in regard to this matter. The leader of the opposition at that time, Mr. Hazen, supported the stand taken by the government. Among other things he said :

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   REPRESENTATION OF THE MARITIME PROVINCES.
Permalink
CON

John Waterhouse Daniel

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. DANIEL.

I do not expect to be able to add anything to the arguments that have been advanced, but I think that it is extremely desirable in a matter of this importance that we should not give more perfunctory assent to the resolution, but should show our sympathy with it. I say this on behalf of myself and the other gentlemen on this side of the House of whom I am the leader.

Further on he said :

I sympathize entirely with the position taken by the members of the government with respect to this resolution, and I desire to say this emphatically so that it will not be possible for any one to say that there was a dissenting voire in this legislature.

So that it was not a party question at all. Mr. Hazen said further :

It cannot be successfully contended that we have not been affected by the increase of Quebec. If the attention of parliament is now called to the matter and to their right to legislate, it seems to me that any government should be willing to apply a remedy as it can be done under the provisions of the Imperial Act of 1871.

In conclusion he said:

In conclusion I may say that I sincerely trust that some practical good will come out of this discussion, and it will give myself and my colleagues on this side of the House great pleasure to strengthen the hands of the government in this matter.

Several other members spoke on the subject, but I will refer to only one more. The Hon. Mr. Hill, after going into the history of the confederation campaign, said :

What will be our condition if the reduction in our representation continues as we fear it may? It will mean taxation without representation. We, as Anglo-Saxons, and as the descendants of those who fought for responsible government, will never submit to that. If it should ever come to pass that we have to contribute to the vast expenditure to build up the west, and we with little or no influence in the councils of the country, if we find our importance buried under a swarm of Doukho-bors, Galicians and Russian Jews, all of whom count in the census we may have to turn to the big brother to the south of us.

Later on he said :

It is not safe to conclude because the sky is cloudless to-day, that we will have no more storms. The United States were lost to Great Britain because the people of these colonies were denied representation in the parliaments of the country. So may it be if our people find our representation gone, and our influence nil in this confederation and our people may find it necessary to look to the great nation to the south.

The short extracts which I have made from the speeches delivered in that debate make it abundantly clear that the whole legislature of New Brunswick, and we might naturally consider that that would mean the whole people of the province,

were extremely Interested in this question and considered it a really vital question, and such it is, as is becoming more evident as the days go on. It is said that there is a remedy for every wrong. If that is true in this ease, how can that remedy be obtained? There is no use of oui; going to the courts. The courts have already decided against us, not on what we consider our claim, but on an amended Act to which we never gave our consent and on which we were never consulted. So that it is not to the courts of law that we must go, but to the parliament of Canada, where not only Acts of parliament, but the equity and justice of the case as well may be considered, and it is on the equity of the case, on the fact that the people of the maritime provinces have not had fair play, in so far as the legislation of the imperial parliament is concerned, but that these British North America Acts have been altered and changed to our disadvantage and without our being consulted that we base our claim. Therefore, it is that we come to this parliament asking for relief, and I feel satisfied in my own mind that that relief must come at some time in the near future from this or some other parliament. On the 13th of February last, I placed on the Order Paper the following resolution :

That in the opinion of this House it is expedient to amend the terms of the British North America Act, 1867, relating to the representation of the several provinces of Canada in the Jlouse of Commons, so as to provide that the number of representatives of any province shall not at any time be reduced below that which was assigned to it when it entered the union.

It is not my intention to move this resolution to-day, as the House is small, a great many of the members, especially from the provinces of Ontario and Quebec being absent. But I would offer the idea contained in this resolution as an equitable means of settling this trouble-a means which would take away the grievance which the lower provinces have at present, due to the fact that the bond of union has been broken without their consent. The carrying out of such an idea could not, I think, meet with any objection, from the provinces of British Columbia or the prairie provinces, or Ontario, and I cannot see any reason why any objection should come from them. In any event, I offer the suggestion as one way by which the wrong from which we claim we are suffering will be righted. The idea is not a new one. When British Columbia entered confederation, she entered it on the condition that although her representation might be increased, it could not be decreased. That provision of the law which was made in favour of British Columbia we ask should be applied also to the other provinces. I understand that it applies also to the Commonwealth of Australia, so that in applying it to the other provinces of con-311

federation, we would be doing no violence whatever to historic precedent.

There is one more point I wish to make. The Act of 1871 authorizes the parliament of Canada to increase the boundaries of the various provinces under mutually agreeable circumstances, on condition that when that is done any of the provinces which might be affected thereby-and that is a very important provision-should be given redress. That is a provision which this parliament did not act up to when it enlarged the boundaries of Quebec; and there can be no doubt that it would be utterly impossible to make any objection to the statement that when the boundaries of Quebec were enlarged, every other province was affected thereby. That section read as follows :

The parliament of Canada may from time to time, with the consent of the legislature of any province of the said Dominion, increase diminish or otherwise alter the limits of such province, upon such terms and conditions as may be agreed by the said legislature, and may, with the like consent make provision respecting the efiect and operation of any such increase or diminution or alteration of territory in relation to any province affected thereby-

So that the parliament of Canada is given authority, under the Act of 1871, to make such arrangements in connection with the other provinces as would do away with any injustice will be more vividly brought to the minds and knowledge of the people in the near future than it is at the present.

I shall say no more on this subject at present. I think it is one which this parliament should take into its most serious consideration. The people of the maritime provinces are becoming awake more and more every year to the seriousness of the condition in which they are as regards their representation. These provinces have no possible means of expanding or extending their boundaries. The province of Prince Edward Island is entirely surrounded by water. The provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick are surrounded by water on three sides, namely, by the Atlantic and the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and on, the other side by the province of Quebec and the State of Maine. There is therefore no possible chance for us to enlarge our boundaries, so that we are in the position of having to fight for what we believe to be our own; and I have not the slightest doubt that that aspect of the case will appeal to the people of the lower provinces, and that they will become more and more united on this subject, with the result that some day, unless this great grievance be rectified, it will be the rallying point around which the people of these provinces will act together and so present a united and strong front to this parliament, which appears to be at present necessary in order

to cause this parliament to make that change for which we are appealing and which it is only just and right we should obtain.

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   REPRESENTATION OF THE MARITIME PROVINCES.
Permalink
?

Mr. O.@

TtTRGEON (Gloucester). Although the remarks made by my hon. friend from the city of St. John (Mr. Daniel) bear on a question which is undoubtedly of great interest to the people of the province from which I come, I regret that he has chosen a time to bring that question forward when public opinion is concentrated on matters of more practical and immediate usefulness. The question is an academic one to-day and may not appeal to the people as urgently perhaps as the hon. gentleman desires. In the meantime, although my hon. friend has cited elaborate documents in support of his contention, I deem it my duty to declare that, although I come from the same province, I am not in accord with the request made by him. It is possible that I may have to meet the censure of many of my colleagues from the province of New Brunswick as well as the other maritime provinces for the stand I take; but as I am well known, in my own province at least, for having always had the courage of my convictions, I consider that on this occasion I am bound to give publicity to the convictions I have entertained for a lifetime and which I have lost no occasion to make' known to the people of the constituency I have the honour to represent and its immediate surroundings.

In opposing any change in our constitution to-day, if I am wrong it is due to an excessive administration of the constitution of the British North America Act. I do not see why any one Canadian to-day should entertain other than an unmeasured admiration for the constitution we have enjoyed for the past forty years. The stand I take is due to the great confidence I have in the resources, wealth, capabilities and possibilities of the maritime provinces which, I am confident, will one day experience an industrial revival and take a leading place in the Dominion. When that day comes, and it is not far distant, I am convinced that the maritime provinces will acquire all the representaton we have lost during the first years of confederation. That we have lost any measure of representation is not due to any defect in the constitution but rather, let us frankly admit, to the lack of energy which the maritime provinces have shown in their own development. The time has come when we should stand together, not so much to look to the precise interpretation to be given to the statute, but to work together as one man for the development of our resources and the improvement of our means of transportation, which will give us the wealth and population that we lack today. I may, however, claim also that I am not altogether alone in the maritime provinces, and especially in New Brunswick, in entertaining the idea that we should stand Mr. DANIEL.

by the Act of Confederation. I know a good many old statesmen and old journalists in New Brunswick, men who have given to their country the best years of their lives, who to-day share my views; and I am sure I have their sympathy when I voice their patriotic warning to the people of the smaller provinces, of the smaller bodies in the confederation to be careful how they depart from the terms of the British North America Act.

Confederation was reached only through great mutual concessions. The hon. member for St. John city (Mr. Daniel) has stated, with due appreciation of their importance, the aspirations that were entertained by the leaders of the people at that time. But every province made its share of concessions, moderating its own claims and merging its local aspirations in those of the wrhole of British America ; and each province received in return privileges which should fairly and equitably balance her rights and interests when weighed in the great national scale of the Dominion. The happiness and permanency of the new-born nation was the common desire which led to the concessions of local interests and made the union possible, and towards which every constructive element was set in motion. Our representation is not only the representation in this House, though it was upon this subject that such strong contentions were put forward at the Quebec conference and at the Charlottetown conference, as well as at the London conference, their proposal of representation by population as a condition sine qua non of union. The people of the maritime provinces, on the other hand, brought under consideration the Intercolonial Railway as a condition sine qua non of union. While it was arrived at that there should be representation by population in this House, and that the construction of the Intercolonial Railway should be carried through, the fathers of confederation looked to further protection for the people of the smaller provinces and provided for that protection by permanent and equal representation in the upper chamber of this parliament of Canada. I claim that to-day the representation of the Canadian people is not merely the representation in the House of Commons, or the representation in the Senate, but the aggregate representation in these two chambers, which together form the parliament of Canada. Our representation in these two Houses are so closely allied that you cannot change one without changing the other ; you cannot destroy one without destroying the other. The texture of our parliamentary representation is so closely interwoven, so intimately united, that if you break even one of its filaments the whole fabric falls in shreds. The representation in this House was a question well understood and well discussed in the maritime provinces, not less in New Brunswick than in

either of the others. It was because of the expected future development of the west and Increase of its population that the people of the province of New Brunswick, as well as those of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island, hesitated to enter into confederation. The only means by which that hesitation was overcome was the provision of permanent equal representation in the Senate. I do not mean to say that the Senate was established for the purpose of giving the smaller portion of the Dominion that representation ; but it was found that the only means of counterbalancing, as we may say, the position of the weaker provinces in this parliament would be by giving them further security in the upper chamber, which security was granted at that time. Myhon. friend from the city of St. John has claimed that the people -were taken by surprise, that they were not aware of what was to take place, that they did not know the position in which the maritime provinces would find themselves after confederation. He has cited as authorities men like the late Sir Albert Smith, who had been an opponent of confederation, to show that the people of New Brunswick were not in accord with the system of representation by population in this House, I might claim that this same Sir Albert Smith became 'one of the most ardent champions of the constitution from the moment that constitution was adopted by the people of Canada, and that he is on record as having held as sacred the very principle of representation by population in this House, even though the representation of his own province was put on a small minority. I might also show that no greater advocate of the present constitution ever arose in New Brunswick than another who had also opposed that constitution before it was proclaimed, Hon. Timothy Warren Anglin, who was first representative in this House of the constituency which I have the honour to represent to-day. It is true that British Columbia was admitted to confederation under a statute by which it was provided that she should not suffer from change in the proportion of population. It may also be placed in contradiction to the position of Prince Edward Island, which came in the next year, but under a statute by which her representation was to be subject to the spirit of the clause of the British North America Act in every point. The introduction of British Columbia into the confederation under a statute by which her representation was not to be decreased, was precisely the fact which awakened Canadian opinion, I might say, to the necessity of holding firm to the principle of representation by population.

At one o'clock, House took recess.

House resumed at three o'clock.

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   REPRESENTATION OF THE MARITIME PROVINCES.
Permalink
LIB

Onésiphore Turgeon

Liberal

Mr. TURGEON.

Mr. Speaker, before recess I was endeavouring to show the con-311i

sensus of opinion which existed at the time of confederation in the maritime provinces as well as in the older provinces when it was proposed that the principle of representation by population should be accepted by the people of New Brunswick and the other maritime provinces provided that equal representation should be given to the maritime provinces in the upper chamber of the parliament of Canada. I have only to refer to the discussion which took place at the time, and which is concisely reported in Pope's confederation documents to find that it was always the aim of the ' fathers of confederation ' to give all due protection to the people of New Brunswick and the maritime provinces. While the people of New Brunswick, of the maritime provinces and the other provinces, as well as the fathers of confederation, were anxious to reach a con-pletion of the negotiations leading up to confederation, while they were even anxious to consummate the idea of securing the construction of the Intercolonial Railway, which would bind the maritime provinces to the provinces of the west, Sir Leonard Tilley himself would have gone back to his province without the Intercolonial Railway if he had not had the assurance that the people would get fair representation under the system of representation by population, if not by equal representation in the House of Commons, at least by the permanency of the representation which would be given them in the upper chamber of this parliament. You will find that Sir John Macdonald, in addressing the delegates from the provinces who were met together at Quebec, said :

In order to have no local jealousies and all things conciliatory, there should be a different system in the two chambers. With the Queen as our sovereign, we should have an upper and a lower House. In the former the principle of equality should obtain. In the lower House the basis of representation should he population, not by universal suffrage, but according to the principles of the British constitution. In the upper House there should be equality in number. The population of Upper Canada is 1,400,000, Lower Canada, 1,200,000, Lower provinces, 750,000. The rate of increase of population in Canada must be greater in future than in the maritime provinces. We considered at Charlottetown that Upper Canada should have twenty members, Lower Canada twenty and the maritime provinces twenty. If not politically united they should still have the same aggregate representation.

You see by that statement that in order to counterbalance the representation of other provinces in the confederation it was proposed that equal privileges should be granted to the people of the maritime provinces in the Upper House. 'We find that Sir Charles Tupper, the most influential representative of the people of his province

at the time, said in the discussion which took place in London :

In the maritime provinces we felt that the great preponderance of Canada could only be guarded against by equal representation in the legislative council.

There was no doubt that the people of the maritime provinces at that time were aware, as we are to-day, that there would be a great preponderance of influence in the west in the future by reason of the immense increase in the population which was bound to take place. It is owing to such an apprehension that the people of the maritime provinces were reluctant for a while to accept the terms offered them by the people of the western provinces. But from the moment that confederation was un fait accompli the very same men who had taken objection to the system of representation by population, who had objected to the terms of confederation, immediately lent their patriotic assistance to the movement in order that every thing might proceed smoothly towards a recognition of the status in which the people have been placed. Our people who are moving for a change in the constitution have always been pleased to quote what has taken place in British Columbia and Prince Edward Island. British Columbia, it is true, was admitted into confederation later on with a fixed representation of six members but that representation was increased under the provisions of the British North America Act. At the same time while we might say that the introduction of British Columbia was against the terms and spirit of the constitution at the time, we see a good deal of difference between the terms upon which British Columbia, with its large territory and immense resources, was admitted and the terms upon which the small province of Prince Edward Island, with a confined area and with less possibilities for the further, was admitted. The fathers of the confederation had determined that the maritime provinces together would have the same permanent representation in the Senate as the provinces of Quebec and Ontario.

The provinces of Quebec and Ontario were given a representation of twenty-four members in the Senate while the maritime provinces with a much smaller population were also allotted twenty-four senators and it was agreed that out of these twenty-four senators when Prince Edward Island entered confederation she should have four of the number. In 1872 British Columbia came into confederation and that province with her great territory and Immense resources was only given three senators, which shows conclusively that the fathers of confederation always maintained proportionate representation in the Senate as protection for the smaller provinces. British

Mr. TTJiRGEON.

Columbia with a large territory and great resources was bound to increase in population, and the terms of her union provided that her representation in the Commons was not to be diminished. When the British Columbia Act of union was submitted to the House the representatives from New Brunswick and others who had been urging before the people their apprehension as to the representation of the smaller provinces when other members entered the confederation, pointed out this danger in parliament. The Hon. T. W. Anglin, the first representative in this House of the constituency which I now have the honour to represent, and who through his position in the legislature as representing St. John, and who through his great newspaper the St. John ' Freeman ' wielded immense influence throughout the maritime provinces and in New Brunswick especially : he was the first to protest against the admission of British Columbia on the basis of a representation of members already existing. He said as reported in the debates of 1871 :

He would not object to the admission of British Columbia to confederation were not the fundamental principle of the constitution trampled upon in the matter of representation.

In the opinion of Mr. Anglin the representation of British Columbia should have been made subject to the constitution as found in the British North America Act. Sir Albert Smith who then represented Wrestmoreland in this House took exception on the same point and he said : -

There were two very important considerations and one of them was that there was a great departure from the principle of the constitution in the matter of representation.

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   REPRESENTATION OF THE MARITIME PROVINCES.
Permalink
?

Sir A. T.@

Galt, who had been one of the leading fathers of confederation said :

He depreciated interference with one of the principles of our constitution, namely, representation by population, by this resolution. He indicated the evils of admitting colonies or territories on the footing of present members of the confederation.

While the statute admitted British Columbia with a representation which was not to be decreased, that conclusion was arrived at by the members of the government no doubt owing to the great possibilities of that province and the certainty that its population would continue to increase. However, the representatives of the maritime provinces and of New Brunswick declared themselves against the introduction of British Columbia under such conditions. When in the following year the smaller province of Prince Edward Island was admitted to confederation we find that she was submitted to the conditions of the British North America Act even in her representation in this House of Commons. A few years before Prince Edward Island had

refused to come into confederation under tliat system of representation, but time had wrought a change in public opinion and at the time of the union they were willing to enter under such terms, a condition which was no doubt rendered necessary by the opposition of the leading representatives of New Brunswick and the maritime provinces when the year before British Columbia had been admitted on the basis of representation of present members. If we are now to endeavour to change the representation of the smaller provinces in the House of Commons, would we not put ourselves in a position to lose that permanency and that equality and that protection which we enjoy to-day in our representation in the Senate. If to-day we are to endeavour to change our representation in this House may it not be that the members from western Canada would endeavour to change the representation which we enjoy in the Senate.

If we insist that in this House our representation shall be based on an electoral unit of 17,000 or 18,000 instead of 25,000, which is the present unit, and which in the future may be 35,000, then it may be that the people of the west would come to the conclusion that we have lost our right to protection in the Senate, and the maritime provinces would, therefore, be in no better position so far as protection in the parliament of Canada is concerned than they are to-day. If to-day we ask the people of the west to extend their sympathy to us so as to give us what we have lost naturally under the terms of confederation, we may open an adverse current of opinion in the larger provinces which may place us in a worse position than we are in by the'loss-of representation which we have suffered. I claim, Mr. Speaker, that we should stand by the constitution. The constitution should be the guide of our patriotism; we should cling to it as to our only plank of salvation. "We have stood by the constitution in the past. We in New Brunswick, the minority in New Brunswick especially, have stood by the constitution ; we have suffered in years gone by for the constitution and in our very sufferings we have learned to admire, to love and to cherish it. We have appealed to the constitution in other moments of danger when provincial rights were assailed; we appealed to the constitution not very long ago when we formed new provinces in the west; we have stood upon the rock of the constitution, and to-day we should place our feet firmly upon that rock; we should maintain and preserve intact the British North America Act and allow time to so harden the mortar and the cement that the materials may cohere and combine to resist all attempts at changes out of a mere spirit of novelty. , , ^ _

Stability is better than uncertainty. We are building a great nation. We have since

confederation made Canada a great nation under the present constitution. We have gone ahead in progress and prosperity at a greater rate than any other nation of the world. Our constitution as it exists has created a national sentiment all over the country from the Atlantic to the Pacific. We want stability to-day more than ever. We are inviting people to come and settle on our fertile plains, to develop our resources. We are inviting them from the British Isles, from the continent of Europe, from the United States, whence they come as fast as steam power can bring them. We want to create a nation which will remain a Canadian nation. We cannot tell after all, what the aspirations of those people may be. They may be varied ; their desires may be excessive ; they may possibly not recognize limitations. We should let people know, as they come and before they come, that Canada is ruled by a stable and inviolate constitution which will for ail time resist attacks not warranted by wisdom or by circumstances. We should certainly put ourselves in a position to withstand in the future every attempt to change the constitution. As I said, in the few words with which I opened my remarks, if I am in error in opposing any change in the constitution which might for the moment appear to be of benefit to my province, I say that a temporary good in the destinies of a nation, especially a nation yet in its formative state, with tendencies to disunion or disturbance, is implicitly a wrong. Therefore I say that we should stand by the terms of our-constitution which is an object of admiration to

other nations.

On every occasion that this subject has been brought before the House, I have heard members from different provinces, more particularly the province from which I come, quote from the constitutions of other countries which would seem to commend themselves to their judgment. I do not see why we should not recognize as much of wisdom, as much of intelligence, as much of patriotism in the constitution of Canada, which was framed by a number of men assembled together at a moment when they were moved by the loftiest possible patriotism-a constitution which has been the admiration of other people, and which should be our admiration every day of the year. I regret as deeply as my hon. friend from St. John the loss by the province of New Brunswick of two or three representatives in this House. But would he and his friends think that the provinces by the sea would be more secure in the future, with two or three more representatives in this House, which is bound before the end of the century to have 300 or 350 members, if the people of the west should at that time claim some larger representation for their provinces in the House or in the

Senate? I have always been opposed to these changes in the constitution.

My hon. .'rend this morning made allusion to the position taken by the New Brunswick legislature some three or four years ago, in asking that some steps should be taken to have this wrong, as they called it, righted. The contention of the legislature at the time was, not that we should have 'a new constitution, but that the Dominion of Canada meant, so far as representation in the House of Commons was concerned, only the four original provinces which came into confederation. For my part, believing as I do that Canada should be compared in its origin to a growing tree. Canada meant the provinces that came in at the time of confederation together witli all the territory that was to come in afterwards. It was not the Act of the smaller provinces of the east alone ; it was the Act of British North America in toto. The courts have decided that the word Canada did not mean only the four original provinces, .but all the provinces that have come in or that may come in in the future. Therefore that agitation has ceased, as the Privy Council has declared that the contention of the provinces could not be sustained.

I have full confidence that the maritime provinces are able to hold their own in this great confederation, in the development that we must expect in our resources, not merely the resources of the sea, which are inexhaustible, not merely the resources of the forest, which are great and powerful, not merdly the resources of the soil, which are immense, but the resources of the undersoil, the resources of coal and iron, which have proved, in recent discoveries, to be the very richest in North America. The development of these resources is bound to bring population and capital to this country. I repeat that if the maritime provinces have lost representation in this House since confederation, it is not so much due to the constitution as it is due to our own lack of energy in the development of our resources.

I place no restriction upon the possibilities of development in the maritime provinces. We have not perhaps made the same efforts for the development of our resources and the keeping of our children at home as have been made in the west. But a new era has begun, our young children have been taught to see their opportunities at home, and I have no doubt that our population will soon reach the point it ought to have reached before now, and we will then be entitled to a larger representation in this House. It is a fact which I am sorry to mention, but which is unquestionable, that since confederation until the last census two-thirds of our young men left our territory. Of late, however, we have been developing our own resources, our young men are finding more attractions at home, our

Topic:   SUPPLY-CALGARY TOWN SITE.
Subtopic:   REPRESENTATION OF THE MARITIME PROVINCES.
Permalink

June 4, 1908