June 24, 1904 (9th Parliament, 4th Session)


Samuel Hughes



in some respects. I know it breaks his heart to have to put up with a, man like the Minister of Agriculture, and to have all these troubles-I do not know any more moderate term to use-forced upon him by a man of the calibre of the Minister of Agriculture. Even then I fail to see eye to eye with Mr. Willison in his admiration of the Prime Minister of Canada. Yet this editor scathes the Minister of Militia and the Minister of Agriculture in the terms that were referred to in this House last night. The biographer of the Prime Minister is the biographer of the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of Militia, and, Sir, if we are to accept his authority in the one case-and he is quoted by Liberals all over the country-then surely we must accept his authority in the other case, as displayed in his appreciation of the great powers of the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of Militia. However, it is a quarrel among themselves, and, as an old trapper up our way says when any of these questions come up, I am not going to meddle in it-we will let them skin their own skunks.
Another reference last night by the Minister of Militia was to our good friend from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk), whom . he taunted with having lost his head. Well, if he has lost his head, he gets on splendidly. As an American once said, he is a mighty lively corpse. The stand that the hon. member for Jacques Cartier made in this House last night is the same stand that he made on former occasions, when he justified himself in Montreal and elsewhere in his public speeches. I may tell the Minister of Militia that his friend the right hon. leader of the government will not express flie views he did in relation to the lack of power and ability of the hon. member for Jacques Cartier. Perhaps the minister was touched a little, because, according to his view, the hon. member for Jacques Cartier had been decapitated by his friends while Lord Dundonald had lost his head by his enemies.
Another point attempted to be made by the Minister of Militia last night was that Lord Dundonald had had a reporter in his pay at the meeting in Montreal. Bad as the Minister of Militia had been up to that time,
I thought that was terrible. I did not really believe that the Minister of Militia could so far forget the little courtesies due from one gentleman to another, especially men who had been associated together for two years past in the capacity of minister and adviser. I could not credit it, until I read ' Hansard ' this morning, that the minister could have so far forgotten himself as to charge Lord Dundonald with hiring a reporter to take notes of his remarks in order that they ifight be published, and then, in the next breath, to charge that Lord Dundonald had sought to keep those remarks from being published. I may say that after I wrote to Lord Dundonald for data, previous to the Mr. SAM. HUGHES.
last time this matter was before the House, I was requested to call upon him ; and I may say that he stated then to me, what the Minister of Militia very properly pointed out last night, that he had got sick of the meddling, and that he was determined, as my good friend from South Lanark (Hon. Mr. Haggart) said, to cut the painter, and if possible educate the people of Canada to the iniquities that were going on, and that he had nothing whatever to do, directly or indirectly, with the bringing of this matter before the public, and cared not whether it was reported or kept in darkness.

Full View