| the truth was, he was ready to respond to public sentiment. For eighteen years he bore the brunt of all the obloquy, and never whispered a word. ... It is not every day you can find such abnegation, and such loyalty to the party, and I have reason to believe and repeat to you-I not only repeat it to you, my colleagues, but I wish my words to be heard all over Canada-that Canada little knows the debt of gratitude it owes to Sir Richard Cartwright.
Here is a statement by the Prime Minister that while Sir Richard Cartwright was not true to his principles, he still continued a minister of the Crown hanging on to his salary, advocating a policy he did not believe in, and throwing Canada's trade into a depth of depression the like of which was never witnessed before. And if to-day we have the prosperity which the hon. gentleman can boast of, it is due to the policy of the Conservative party, fought against and denounced as it was for twenty years by the party now in power. The hon. gentleman (Sir Richard Cartwright) complained that the Conservative party had been true to themselves, and that while they attended to the constituencies represented by their friends they neglected the constituencies which returned opponenrs. Well, there is no fear that the Minister of Trade and Commerce will forget his friends. No one who reads the public accounts can charge him with ingratitude.
As I was looking through the pages of history, I could almost fancy that all the Canadian public were named Cartwright.
I found F. L. Cartwright, with $1,000 ; Col. R. Cartwright, with $2,890 ; secretary Cartwright of the Railway Commission, with $4,000; Rev. Cartwright, of the Kingston penitentiary, with $1,200; Henry George Cartwright, with $550 ; the secretary of Sir Richard Cartwright, nephew, with $2,200 ; and, last but not least, the salary of the gallant knight himself ; making a total of $20,250 a year that the people of this country pay for the privilege of having the Cartwright family in Canada, If the gallant knight for South Oxford wants to publish the literature of the Liberal party, let him take the sheet which I have just read ; and if he feels that he cannot circulate it I will reciprocate the kind offer he made to this side of the House, by having it printed and circulated for the benefit of the Liberal party, in order that the people of Canada may know the great financial sacrifices which the Cartwright family have mad * for the country. Alexander Mackenzie said that Canada does not care for a rigid adherence to principles of government. I wonder what that hon. gentleman would say now if he were here to witness the giving away not only of principles, but, what is more sacred, the very life of the gallant member for South Oxford, a man of such wonderful abilities that he selected himself
to be Minister of Finance before he gained power. I listened to-day to the old chestnuts which the hon. gentleman was telling us. Mr. Speaker, I am going to be charitable. There is a time in every man's life when the mind ceases to operate on the present and future, and only applies itself to the past 'Consequently th;e hon. gentleman is confined to those two or three old stories on this subject which he* has given us so many times in the past.
In regard to the hon. gentleman's position in this House, every man's history or position in Canada is what he makes it. If he found himself driven from the Liberal party in 1896, wandering about alone in the province of Ontario-if the party to which he belongs and which he had been affiliated all those years could not afford to tolerate him as one of their associates on the political platform-if he had achieved such a failure as that, I want to ask what was the result of his labours in those years when he was deriding Canada, and applying to it all the bad names and adjectives that he could find in the English language. The only effect of it was to turn away from our shores hundreds of thousands of people who would have come here to make homes for themselves. We on this side of the House had to fight for our great western country, and none knows it better than the hon. gentleman himself, whose articles defaming this country were published in magazines and sent broadcast by American railroad companies throughout the known world. Under these circumstances it is not to be wondered at that the western states were settled before western Canada.
^ There was a true patriotic people and no Richard John Cartwright in the United States. At that time we had to fight for ihe building of a railroad into our western country, against the opposition of the right hon. gentleman both in this House and in the country, and against his threats to the farmers that it would mortgage their farms for the rest of their lives. The hon. gentleman's course tended to prevent the people of Canada learning the real truth as to our western country, so that when the railroad was constructed, and the time for settling the country came, and we applied to our own people what did we find ? We found that the speeches delivered by hon. gentlemen opposite and their resolutions moved in parliament had the effect of turning the tide of immigration to the western states instead of to western Canada. So we had to begin to convert our own Canadian people to a realization of the wealth and the future possibilities of that great western country, as well as to remove the prejudice against it which had been created in the minds of foreigners. At that time the United States had no surplus population, while they had plenty of territory, and they were bringing in millions of foreign people to settle upon their vacant
lands. It was not until a later period that the Canadian Northwest began to fill up* and during the later years of the Conservative administration we began to send immigration agents into the western states and into eastern states as well-and some of these men continue to be employed by the present government and are doing good work-and in that way we laid the foundation of that influx of population into that country which has taken place in recent years, including the return from the United States of many Canadians ; and the members of this House will not complain if every Canadian who went to the United States learns of the true value of our great Northwest, and returns to the land of his nativity. We will welcome every one of them. With regard to settlers' effects, that question is confined chiefly to the west. No settlers' effects to any particular extent comq, into eastern Canada. The law with regard to them has been the law of the land for many years, and it may continue to be for some years to come, so that no special credit can be taken for it by one party or the other.
No hon. gentleman on the other side can say that he, and he alone, or the policy and the party to which he belongs, created that inflow of people. It is the natural overflow of the United States, and England, and of eastern Canada, that is beginning to come into Canada instead of going abroad, as it did in all those years I have referred to. But if you take settlers' effects, you will find that in 1902 the value of $1,500,000 went from Canada Into the United States. That would be almost altogether from Eastern Canada. You can run down through a period of several years, and you will find each year -settlers' effects to the value of t million and a quarter dollars have gone into the United States, so that when the hon. member for South Oxford (iSir Richard Cartwright) claims that the exodus from Canada to the United States is a thing of the past, he cannot, if he has any sincerity or truth, base that claim on anything except his own belated imagination. The right hon. gentleman only gave one set of statements. When I heard him give quotations from the Bible, I began to hope that he had been imbibing in his heart of hearts the truths of that great volume, and that we would have no more one-sided statements presented by him, but in this I was sadly mistaken.
At six o'clock, House took recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.
Subtopic: S, 1904