George Davidson GRANT

GRANT, George Davidson

Personal Data

Party
Liberal
Constituency
Ontario North (Ontario)
Birth Date
June 25, 1870
Deceased Date
March 17, 1915
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Davidson_Grant
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=2e8d5309-8946-424f-8679-b5b1c8d259d2&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
lawyer

Parliamentary Career

March 10, 1903 - September 29, 1904
LIB
  Ontario North (Ontario)
November 3, 1904 - September 17, 1908
LIB
  Ontario North (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 13)


May 30, 1905

Mr. GRANT.

Will the hon. gentleman pardon me interrupting him ? I said the suggestion was thrown out ; I read it from Unrevised ' Hansard,' page 6718.

Topic:   PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST-DISCUSSION OF BILL.
Full View Permalink

May 19, 1905

Mr. HAG G ART.

Would my hon. friend give us a statement of the amount of notes in circulation and the value to the government of having these notes, what the interest amounts to ?

Topic:   SUPPLY-THE RAILWAY COMMISSION.
Subtopic:   THESSALON, ONT., POSTMASTER.
Full View Permalink

April 17, 1905

Mr. GRANT.

My good friend-I may call him so-from East Grey, is no doubt an expert in medicine but I do not know if he and I entered into a legal argument either he or I would be wiser nor would the House be the wiser for that argument. I would say that the Northwest Territories by their ordinances have practically set up a system of schools satisfactory to themselves, because in my judgment-and I give it for what it is worth-they have very much restricted the rights of the minority as expressed and given by the law of 18T5, and I think Sir John Thompson was of that opinion and practically expressed it in a minute of council in reference to the petition for disallowance in 1894, so that I say, by taking the action which they did take, they to some extent at least have formulated a school policy that is satisfactory to themselves. It is also to be remembered that this Dominion parliament in 1875 held out the assurance of certain educational privileges to the minority and it is to this parliament that that minority must look for the protection of its rights. The legislation of 1875 in regard to education may have been ill-advised ; I do not say whether it was or not, it may have been ill-advised or it may have been very wise legislation. However, it has remained ever since on our statute-book and therefore I say that the somewhat specious phrase ' trust the new provinces ' has no particular force. The promise was made, the undertaking was entered into by this Dominion parliament and this sovereign parliament having enacted the law, having held out the inducement to the incoming settler, having continued the law in force, gave every sign that the law was to remain in force, ft is, therefore, incumbent on this parliament to follow the course set forth in the Bill. I have wondered since this agitation began, whether if the original proportion of Catholics and Protestants had remained in those Territories we would have had all the trouble and commotion that we have to-day. As I understand it, at the very beginning of the settlement of those new Territories the Catholic people Mr. GRANT.

were largely in the majority. They were the first settlers, they were the pioneers of those districts and were necessarily in the great majority. I want to know if that preponderance of Catholic population had kept up in the Territories and we found it existing to-day if we would have all this trouble and agitation over our proposals. I think, Mr. Speaker, we would have had a demand for the Protestant separate schools that they have in the province of Quebec to-day, and as a Protestant, if it were the very last vote I gave in the House of Commons, I would give that vote with the feeling that I was only doing equity and dealing fairly with this minority in casting my vote for the perpetuation of their privileges.

Now, Sir, I have said that the hon. leader of the opposition made it a point that the merits and demerits of separate schools

to what must be a very valuable opinion as to separate schools in Ontario. I want to refer to the opinion of the Toronto ' Globe ' expressed in 1895, at a time when, if my memory serves me right, there was an attack being made upon the Liberal government in Ontario in regard to the separate school question.

Topic:   PROVINCIAL AUTONOMY IN THE NORTHWEST.
Full View Permalink

April 17, 1905

Mr. GEO. D. GRANT (North Ontario).

Some few weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of the discussion on tills Bill, my hon. friend from Leeds (Mr. Taylor), Mr. GALLIHER

who is not now in his seat, I am sorry to say, was good enough to say that he would like to have an expression of opinion on this Bill from the member for North Ontario. In the course of his remarks on that occasion, my hon. friend referred to a by-election which took place in my riding some two or three years ago, the contestants in which were the hon. member for North Toronto (Mr. Foster) and myself. The hon. gentleman said that the Manitoba Remedial Bill was one of the issues, if not the principal issue, in that campaign. Now, I cannot let that statement go entirely unchallenged. Necessarily I took considerable interest in that by-election, and therefore must be supposed to know what the issues in it were, and I have this to say that not only was the Manitoba Remedial Bill and the action of the late Conservative government in reference thereto and the action of the ex-Finance Minister (Air. Foster), then a candidate, in the same connection- not only were all these matters not principal issues but they were not issues at all. Furthermore I do not think that the Manitoba Remedial Bill or the Manitoba school question has been at all an issue in the province of Ontario since the general election of 1896. I am much afraid, Mr. Speaker, that the memory of my hon. friend from Leeds (Mr. Taylor) is not at all dependable; I am afraid his memory plays pranks with him. And in this fear I am rather confirmed by what fell from the lips of his late leader, Sir Mackenzie Bowell, who spoke in another place on the 1st of March last. Speaking of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Taylor) in relation to another matter then under discussion, Sir Mackenzie Bowell said :

I am utterly at a loss to know or understand how Mr. Taylor could have given utterance to such a statement, unless it be that he talked it over so often with others that he finally believed it himself. That is an idiosyncrasy of some people, as we know.

Well, in the best of good nature, I rather think that in his recollection of what took place in the election in North Ontario that idiosyncrasy of my hon. friend from Leeds has shown itself.

The hon. member for St. Antoine, Montreal (Mr. Ames), who preceded me in this debate on Thursday last, made, in my judgment, a very moderate, calm and dignified statement of the case. He told how generously, how very well indeed, the Protestant minority of Quebec were treated by the Catholic majority of that province. But I rather think, in fact I am strongly of opinion, that the hon. gentleman marred it forceful and eloquent speech by the reference he made to the attitude of hon. members on this side of the House who support the government on this question. On more than one occasion, more frequently than was necessary to my mind, the hon. member for St. Antoine thanked ids

pleader for the freedom of action which bad been given to individual members of tbe opposition on this question. He seemed indeed very grateful that freedom of action bad been granted. In fact, he said, if not in so many words, yet in ,effect, that had it not been for that freedom of action given by tbe leader of tbe opposition to bis followers, be doubted whether be would take tbe position which be is taking upon the Bill. I have nothing to quarrel with in that attitude of tbe lion, gentleman. But be went on to express bis great sympathy for members on tbe government side who, be seemed to think, were bound to stand by the government-bound in what way I do not know-in its proposed legislation in regard to the Northwest. I must say to the bon. gentleman that we cannot accept his sympathy on this side-we do not want it. And I take strong exception to the innuendo in his remarks as to the attitude of government members iii supporting this Bill. I cannot understand him. Surely tbe bon. gentleman will not say that tbe same arguments for toleration, for respect for tbe rights of a minority, which appeal to him may not also appeal to individual members on tbe government side. Tbe boil, gentleman said-and I think it is not beside tbe question for me to refer to bis words and to clear up these points before entering upon the consideration of tbe main part of tbe issue-that bis leader-

has told them that they shall one and all

consult their constituents and their conscience and shall then vote as they see fit upon this Bill.

I want to tell tbe bon. gentleman that no instructions, no advice, different from that has emanated from the right bon. gentleman (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) who leads tbe government to his followers.

Topic:   PROVINCIAL AUTONOMY IN THE NORTHWEST.
Full View Permalink

April 17, 1905

Mr. GRANT.

I agree with tbe Finance Minister to this extent-that tne resignation of this government and the advent to power of my boil, friend -from East Grey (Mr. Sproule) and bis friends would be a sad calamity for tbe Dominion of Canada.

Topic:   PROVINCIAL AUTONOMY IN THE NORTHWEST.
Full View Permalink