May 2, 1905 (10th Parliament, 1st Session)

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.
Full View