Mr. E. B. DEVLIN (Wright).
Mr. Speaker, before resuming the line of my remarks, I would like to call attention to a sentence in the Halifax * Herald ' of February 25, 1910, which reads as follows :
Order was at last restored by Mr. Devlin promising not to quote His Excellency, although he added with some bitterness, ' What did lie send me his speech for if I am not allowed to read it?
I used no such language, and in the matter there was absolutely no bitterness in tone or otherwise. My words, and I give them for accuracy, in order that the organs of the Conservative party may sometimes speak fairly of gentlemen on this side of the House, were:
This pamphlet was sent me, I do not know by whom, but I always presumed that it was sent by His Excellency for my benefit; and, as I found in it certain passages bearing upon the subject before the House, I was simply going to give the House the benefit of them.
When the House rose on Thursday night I was pointing out as well as I could that the attitude which had been taken by the government upon the question of the Naval Bill, which is now under discussion, was a natural and logical sequence to the different resolutions which had been introduced into this House by hon. gentlemen opposite and by the right hon. leader of the House. Since the first resolution was introduced peculiar scenes have been witnessed. The hon. member for North Toronto (Mr. Foster) constituted himself in matters naval, the leader of the opposition, but he had hardly given the word of command before the hon. member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) found that he also should give his word of command, which was more directly to be applied to the province of Quebec. The hon. member for Victoria and Haliburton (Mr. Hughes) and other hon. gentlemen thought that they also should give a word of command which might differ from the word of command given by the hon. member for North Toronto, the leader in naval matters, and immediately the hon. member for Halifax (Mr. R. L. Borden) bolted from his party. The hon. member for Jacques
Cartier, (Mr. Monk), the hen. member for Victoria and Haliburton (Mr. Hughes), and the hon. member for North Toronto (Mr. Foster), went in search of the hon. member for Halifax (Mr. Borden). The hon. member for Jacques Cartier found the hon. member for Halifax addressing the multitudes in the province of Quebec; the hon. member for Victoria and Haliburton discovered him addressing the multitudes in the maritime provinces; and there he had a different creed; the hon. member for North Toronto found him addressing the multitudes in the province of Ontario, and there again he had a different creed. After these three hon. gentlemen heard the different creeds of the bon. member for Halifax, they marched him back here to the seat of government, and there made him expound his article of faith, which is to be found in the amendment which he proposes to the Bill now under discussion. What does he say? In speaking to the province of Quebec, the hon. leader of the opposition-I refer now to the hon. member for Halifax-says at page 3067 of ' Hansard ' :
I would invite my right lion, friend to-day to again respond to the popular will, and the will of this country to-day is thac these different proposals ought to be submitted to the people and the people ought to be permicted to pass upon them before any permanent policy of this kind is engaged in.
Then, addressing the masses in the lower provinces, he goes on to say:
I think there is a great deal to be said in favour of that course. I am as strong as any man in this country in the belief that it is the duty of Canada to participate upon a permanent basis in the defence of this empire and to do our reasonable share in that regard.
But, addressing the multitudes in the province of Ontario, he says, at page 3068 of * Hansard ' :
So, Sir, I say we should make our aid prompt and generous, so that it may bring to the motherland the assurance not only of material support but of courage, faith and determination which shall proclaim alike to friend and foe that whether in peace or in war, the empire is one and undivided.
These hon. gentlemen, after they had thought the matter over, as the hon. member for St. Anne (Mr. Doherty) told us, in the morning, in the afternoon, and while lying awake at night, prepared the ammunition which they were to discharge at the government, and, if I were permitted to use the words of Senator Beveridge, I would say that they engaged in what we on this side, and what the Canadian public are beginning to understand to be mere pot-shot warfare with wax bullets from air guns. Let me ask hon. gentlemen opposite whether they think that, in order
to prevent the British empire from going to smash, we must immediately cable over a sum of $20,000,000 or the equivalent of two Dreadnoughts. The imperial House has been now in session some time, yet we find no mention there made of this imminent peril from Germany. But we need not go to the old country to find what is the opinion in England, we have had it expressed in this country; we have had it expressed in the press so fond of supporting hon. gentlemen opposite; we have had it expressed by hon. gentlemen opposite themselves. The hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Borden) knows well that there is in this city a newspaper which has always supported the opposition. It is a fair newspaper, for which I have_ the greatest possible esteem, and which bears weight in this country when it speaks upon imperial matters. What did the ' Evening Journal,' on the 21st December, 1909, say, in a very important editorial, dealing with the question of the American colonies. It said: v
England will make no further mistake in the old direction; hut some of our own people now want to make that old mistake by forcing on the rest of our people the idea of sending our taxes to England to be spent there, and such a policy is as sure to produce the same old sort of festering irritation among ourselves against the imperial tie, though not so acute in degree, as did that old policy of one hundred and fifty years ago. A Canadian navy wonld he a continually growing powerful support to the empire, free from all complication as regards imperial finance. Periodical Canadian contributions to the navy of England
Such as hon. gentlemen opposite advocate to-day-
-would not at best amount to shucks as an imperial asset in the long run, and would tend to stir up continual friction and turmoil in this country, which might ultimately go far towards smashing British connection.
Not only did the press speak _ in this manner hut hon. gentlemen opposite, before they heard the .speeches of the hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Borden), gave expression to their views to the same effect, and in no unmeasured terms. We have for instance the utterance of one hon. gentleman who is prepared to do as much for the empire as any hon. member in this House-an hon. gentleman) who risked his life for the empire, not only in this country, but on the battlefields of South Africa. I Tefer to the hon. member for Victoria and Haliburton (Mr. S. Hughes). What 'did he say? On the ^ 14th February, 1907, as you will see by 'Hansard', page 2898, he said, referring to the proposed sending of men! and money from the colonies for the building of the empire:
1. Did the government of this province ever purchase, for distribution in the public schools, any copies of the work of J. P. Tar-divel, called " Pour la Patrie "?
2. If so, how many copies were purchased, at what date, and by whom was the order given ?
Answer by Honourable Mr. Boy:
1 and 2. On the 25th September, 1895, the Provincial Secretary, Hon. L. P. Pelletier, purchased 500 copies of Mr. J. P. Tardivel's work, " Pour la Patrie ", at 60 cents per copy.
This work was not given as prize books, as appears by the answer given by the Provincial Secretary, not a Liberal Provincial Secretary but by the Provincial Secretary in the Flynn ministry, the Hon. Mr. Hac-kett, on the 3rd of December, 1896. The purchase price was paid out of the item ' prize books,' in the estimates of public instruction. Do you think by order of the legislature? By order of the Liberal party in the province of Quebec? Not at all, by order of the Provincial Secretary, the chief organizer of the Conservative party in the province of Quebec, the Hon. L. P. Pelletier.
The hon. member for North Toronto (Mr. Foster) in the course of the remarks which he offered to this House upon the Naval Bill, for some reason or other-and I shall leave it to the judgment of the House what his reason was-made a direct onslaught upon two gentlemen, French Canadians by race, the late Hon. Mr. Mercier, whose memory is held in the highest possible esteem in the province of Quebec, and the right hon. the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier), who is honoured and respected in the highest degree in that province. At page 3467 of ' Hansard ' the hon. member (Mr. Foster) said:
He (Mr. Mercier) was allied with men in the United States of America, he drew his salary from them, he paid his expenses out of their collections. He travelled the country, as I said, enlisting French Canadians, and men of other nationalities, prominent American citizens, all in favour of the independence of Canada; and along with it was the propagation of continental union, and the union of Canada with the United States.
Further on he says:
Now, I ask my right hon. friend, and I ask this House: What would have happened in this country if my right hon. friend had been successful, and Canada had demanded and had obtained that power? There would have been no guarantee for the union of Canada with the empire for a single five years. It was a demand, not for autonomy, it was a demand for sovereignty, and a sovereignty which, if it were exercised, would make two nations where now there is the mother country and the Dominion under the mother country.
* He goes on to quote certain words that were quoted by the right hon. the Prime Minister, and then he concludes:
Subtopic: NAVAL SERVICE OF CANADA.