"Que le LIEUTENANT-GOUVERNEUR de la Province de Québec, soit respectueusement prié de transmettre ces résolutions à SON EXCELLENCE le GOUVERNEUR GÉNÉRAL. essai a avorté. Lorsque le Gouvernement de Québec se décida à venir en aide aux chemins de fer de la province, la face des choses changea et le petit chemin de St. Jérôme devint le grand chemin de Colonisation qui devait être relié au Pacifique et compter parmi les plus importantes voies ferrées de la Province. Le chemin de Colo On voit, M. le Président, par les résolutions que je viens de lire, que la législature de Québec, que l'on accuse d'être impotente et sans capacité, pose la question de la manière la plus humble et la plus modeste, en même temps que la plus juste et la plus ration-nisation du Nord fut donc entrepris, pennelle, quoiqu'en ait dit l'hon. député de Chateauguay, qui a bien mérité la sévère leçon que lui a donnée le député de Charlevoix pour se poser ainsi en Jupiter Tonnant et appliquer l'épithète de moribond à la législature de Québec, qu'il a non-seulement taxée de nullité mais en même temps d'être avilie et déshonorée. On est encore en droit de dire avec vérité, malgré les insultes du député de Chateauguay, que la législature de Québec, par sa dignité, l'indépendence et le caractère élevé de ses membres, sa conduite honorable et l'importance qu'elle a eue dans ce Parlement, a bien mérité du pays. M. le Président, il me fait peine d'avoir à m'occuper maintenant de la réponse si peu satisfaisante que l'hon. Ministre du Revenu de l'Intérieura faite aux objections de mon honorable ami le député de Terrebonne, dont il n'a aucunement attaqué les arguments. Il s'est borné à dire que nous avions demandé en 1872, précisément ce que le Gouvernement fait aujourd'hui. Ce qui revient à dire que l'entreprise étant à faire, nous n'avions pas le droit, sous des circonstances différentes, de promouvoir par des moyens meilleurs, les intérêts de notre province et du pays en général. Je ne trouve ni convenable ni patriotique cette manière de raisonner sur les grandes questions, et je regrette que l'hon. ministre ait cru y avoir recours et se soit servi dans ce but de citations tronuqées. Les fais historiques, retracés avec bonne foi, remettront les choses dans leur lumière exacte et tel qu'il convient pour la Chambre d'un grand pays. Si on n'entendait que le Premier Ministre, on ne comprendrait pas les vues de ceux qui dès 1870 et 1872 entreprenaient, sur l'avis et l'expérience présumée, de M. HULBURT de sillonner le pays de chemin à lisses en bois. Le chemin de Colonisation du Nord était alors à l'état d'embrion ; on croyait faire un chemin à lisses de bois et à jaugeage étroit pour le transport du bois de corde à Montréal. C'était aussi le moment où le chemin Gosford était entrepris—on sait quel grâce à la sévérité de notre climat, ce premier Mr. Mousseau. dant que celui de Gosford échouait. En 1871, l'annexion de la Colombie à la puissance consacra le projet de la confection du chemin du Pacifique, comme condition de cette annexion, et en 1871-2 il fut question d'amalgamer le chemin de fer de Colonisation et le Canada Central comme moyens de relier les deux lignes à la grande voie du Pacifique, et d'assurer à la Province de Québec tous les avantages en dérivant. La politique des octrois du Gouvernement de Québec aux chemins de fer, inaugurée en 1873, ne fut appliquée qu'en 1874; et comme on n'avait pas encore en Janvier 1872 passé la statut qui devait assurer la construction du Pacifique, il ne pouvait être question alors de relier le chemin de fer de Colonisation avec celui du Pacifique. Plus tard le Canada Central et le chemin de Colonisation s'étant brouillés, leur projet de connexion avec le Pacifique fut`aban donné. L'octroi de Québec fut efficace puisque le chemin est en grande partie construit. Il a été question de le relier avec le Pacifique, et c'est ce qui aurait dû être fait ; mais lorsque l'on vit qu'on aurait l'aide de Québec on résolut unanimement de faire la connexion et pour cela on fit en 1874 des explorations pour faire pousser le chemin jusqu'à la rivière Creuse et plus loin, si possible, jusqu'au lac Nispissingue. On avait cru découvrir que c'était la ligne la plus courte; mais le premier ministre prétend aujourd'hui que tel n'est pas le cas. Le Gouvernement de Québec accordait suffisamment pour faire la connexion avec le chemin du Pacifique le chemin du Pacifique, sans l'aide fédéral ni l'amalgame avec le Canada Central. Eh bien M. le Président, en face des désirs de la Province de Québec, lesquels sont on ne peut plus justes et raisonnables, on doit décider lo. de dédaigner ses représentations et l'état des choses réel dans une question comportant la dépense de sept ou huit millions de piastres. 2o. qu'on ne peut rien faire parce que nous-mêmes en 1872, dans le temps où le chemin de colonisation n'avait pas d'aide, où la politique du gouvernement ! de Québec n'était pas encore de sillonner | challenged the hon. member for South le pays de chemins de fer, nous n'avions Bruce, who had referred to that pas prévu tous les changements qui sont arrivés depuis. Est-ce pour de telles raisons, M. le Président, que l'on doit repousser les représentations de la législature de Québec, mépriser cette législature même et passer outre aveuglement? Non, et j'espère que l'item proposé ne rencontrera pas, sous ces circonstances, le ooncours qu'il devrait avoir, seulement après un rejet justement motivé des propositions de la province de Québec. En résumé, la Province de Québec dit : je prétends avoir des droits; voici mes titres. Au moins, ne me condamnez pas sans les examiner. Néanmoins, le premier ministre et son gouvernement veulent nous condamner sans nous entendre. J'ose encore espérer que cette injustice ne sera pas commise contre la Province de Québec. Mr. WRIGHT (Pontiac) gave notice that he would on concurrence move an amendment. A brief discussion ensued as to whether the debate should be adjourned. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said he wished the vote to be passed to-night, and promised that the same liberty of discussion would be allowed on concurrence as in Committee of the Whole. Mr. THOMPSON (Cariboo) said that as the new terms to British Columbia had been accepted, he would not oppose them, but there were certain features in connection with the Government scheme to which he objected. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE-I have no scheme to present to the House. I am simply asking a vote of money to carry out the law of the land. Mr. THOMPSON hoped the law of the land would be carried out in a satisfactory manner. He objected to a system of mixed land and water communication, and desired to see a continuous line of railway stretching across the whole continent. It was to be hoped that the money which was now being voted would be used to prosecute the work with the greatest energy, for he believed that every dollar spent on the road would add to the prosperity of the country. He denied that the petition of certain parties on the main-land, referred to in the Minute of Council, indicated any willingness on the part of the people to accept the terms proposed by Mr. EDGAR, and he Mr. Mousseau. petition, to point out a single clause in‘it which would bear out the view that the signers of it were willing to accept those terms. The statement made in that same Minute of Council that there was every reason to believe that a majority of the people of British Columbia accepted the proposals of Mr. EDGAR was entirely incorrect, as he knew from his own personal knowledge. Another statement contained in the Minute of Council was equally incorrect, viz. : that assurances had been given to the Government by a gentleman of high position, an ex-member of the Legislature, that the proposals were favorably received by the people, and he would guarantee that the people would accept them. He (Mr. THOMPSON) thought he knew who the gentleman referred to was; but he knew this much that in British Columbia there was no man who could presume to act the part of dictator. However, he might add that the people of British Columbia were willing to accept any measure that would relieve the Government from their embarrassment. Before he sat down he wished to ask the Minister of Public Works whether it was the intention of the Government to construct the telegraph line and put it in working order before the line of railway was located. was a point of some importance, because if the telegraph line were constructed where it was supposed the road would go, and subsequently the line were changed, another telegraph line would have to be built. This Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said it was intended to build the telegraph line along the railroad. Hon. Mr. TUPPER said it was quite evident that a good many members wished to continue the discussion, and as the hour was late, he hoped the First Minister would agree to an adjournment of the debate. In his opinion, the vote which the committee were called upon to páss involved not only matters of new policy, but also a question of illegal expenditure. There was no law upon the statute book whatever, with reference to contracts for a Canadian line of telegraph. The law provided that the Government might contract for the building of telegraph lines. after the location of the line of railway. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE—I cannot tell the precise point, but it is somewhere between Douglas and Pembroke. The words used in the contract, I believe, are that the terminus shall be in the vicinity of Douglas, but the precise point, I think, is not yet determined. on Mr. BUNSTER said the people of British Columbia did not wish for anything that would be unjust to the rest of the Dominion. They had, perhaps, more enlarged views this subject than other residents of Canada. They wished to have the railroad prosecuted vigorously, becaused they believed the Dominion as a whole would benefit by it. He invited Parliament to hold its next session at Victoria where they would be treated hospitably and have their ideas enlarged. The same propositions, in effect, which he offered last year to Parliament and for which he received but five votes, were now submitted by the Government, and he felt that he had every reason to be satisfied with the course he had pursued on that occasion. He was proceeding to discuss the question at more length when at the suggestion of several members, he agreed to yield the floor, and Hon. Mr. Tupper. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Monday, March 8th, 1875. The SPEAKER took the chair at three PETITION OF J. B. FRASER & CO. the Committee on Public Accounts, and Hon. Mr. HOLTON said there was a Mr. DOMVILLE said this was the first convenient moment since the presentation of the petition for making this motion, and as it was a case of urgency, he hoped the motion would be allowed to be put now. Mr. SPEAKER-The question of urgency might have been raised on Friday when the petition was received. Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD observed that the committee were sitting from to-day, and if the House was willing that the petitioners should be heard by counsel, it was important that permission should be granted without delay. Hon. Mr. HOLTON said his hon. friend would remember that there was another order specially fixed for to-day, and it would not be fair to allow it to stand over in order that the House might take up this motion out of its order, especially as it was a motion which would give rise to a long debate. He therefore objected to the consideration of this motion now. The motion was ruled out of order. PRIVATE AND LOCAL BILLS. The following Private and Local Bills, passed through Committee of the Whole, were read a third time and passed :— Mr. MOSS-To change the name of the Imperial Building, Savings and Investment Company to that of the Imperial Loan and Investment Company. Hon. Mr. FOURNIER-I have to inform the hon. gentleman that the election law of 1874 provides that suits against such offences ought to be taken within twelve months. I believe that the twelve months have now expired in most cases, but I draw the attention of the hon. gentleman to several clauses of the Election Act providing specially for the punishment of those cases by the judges when trying the elections. I believe that if these provisions had been complied with they were quite sufficient to meet the case mentionhim to the clauses giving the Judge the tioned by the hon. gentleman. I refer power during the trial to summon to appear before him any elector or officer who has been proved or against whom evidence has been given of having committed any offence under the Act, the power to try him summarily. If this had been complied with, it would have been sufficient. Mr. CASGRAIN-There is one part of the question which the hon. gentleman has not answered; I mean in so far as the privileges of this House are concerned. Hon. Mr. FOURNIER-The House has divested itself of all control in such them. Mr. CAMERON (South Ontario)—To amend the Act incorporating the London cases, leaving it to the Judges to deal with and Canada Bank, and change the name to "The Bank of the United Provinces." Mr. BABY—To incorporate the Industrial Life Insurance Company. Mr. FRECHETTE-To incorporate La Banque St. Jean Baptiste. THE LEPINE COMMUTATION. PENSIONS TO VETERANS. Mr. STEPHENSON inquired as to the modus operandi necessary to enable veterans entitled to pensions for military services rendered, to obtain such pensions from the Canadian Government. Mr. SPEAKER read a message from Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE-The mere HIS EXCELLENCY transmitting copies of mode of obtaining the pensions will, of further correspondence which has taken course, be contained in the regulations to place with the Secretary of State for the be adopted and published in the Gazette Colonies, relating to the commutation of as soon as the money is at the disposal of the sentence of death passed on the Government. AMBROISE LEPINE for the murder of THOMAS SCOTT at Fort Garry. CORRUPT PRACTICES AT ELECTIONS. Mr. CASGRAIN asked whether it is the intention of the Government to take any steps or proceedings, in so far as regards the privileges of this House, against such witnesses as are reported by the Election Judges or Election Courts as having been guilty of corrupt practices, or otherwise, at the elections held for the present Parliament; and if so, when, and in what manner? Hon. Mr. Cartwright. ALLOWANCES TO POSTMASTERS. ORDNANCE LANDS AT FREDERICTON, Mr. DOMVILLE asked whether the Government have sold any portion of the Ordnance. Lands in Fredericton fronting on the river in the centre of the city to Messrs BURPEE & TEMPLE or other parties. If so, what quantity of land; also price paid or to be paid for same and terms? Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE-The Government have not sold any of these lands. Application was made by the railway company owning the line from the junction to the city for a portion of those lands. Lieut.-Colonel MONSELL, Deputy Adjutant General, was requested to value these lands. He valued the portion applied for at $6,000. Subsequent information led the Government to believe that the lands were worth more, and no sale was carried out. If sold now, it will be by public auction. THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. Mr. PALMER asked whether it is the întention of the Government to take any and what measures to secure to Canada at as early a day as possible the amount of compensation to which she is entitled by the 22nd Article of the Treaty of Washington ? Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE-The Government have already taken the necessary steps to have an arbitration brought on as speedily as possible. NEW BRUNSWICK SCHOOL LAW. mation of hon. members who were absent during previous discussions. In order that the House might thoroughly understand the position which the minority of the people of New Brunswick occupied he called attention to the fact that for many years previous to 1858 they enjoyed to all intents and purposes a system of separate denominational schools. In 1858 when the question came up for legislation and the new law was to be framed; the different sentiments of the people were laid before the Legislature by petition. Upwards of one hundred petitions were submitted, of which five sixths asked that the privelege enjoyed by the Catholic population of maintaining separate schools. might be respected in any future legislation. A few petitions were placed before the Legislature asking that no principle of Sectarian Education should be recognized, while other gentlemen, including some clergy men, prayed that no public grant of money should be given to any school in New Brunswick in which the Bible was not read daily. The Act of 1858—in the only section that applied to this case-was one which related to the duties of teachers. The section is as follows: Every teacher shall take diligent care, and exert his best endeavors to impress on the minds of the children committed to his care, the principles of Christianity, morality and justice, and a sacred regard to truth and honesty, love of their country, loyalty, humanity and a universal benevolence, sobriety, industry and frugality, chastity, moderation and temperance, order and cleanliness, and all other virtues which are the ornaments of human society; but, no pupil shall be required to read or study in or from any religious book, or join in any act of devotion objected to by his parents. or guardians; and the Board of Education shall, by regulation, secure to all children whose parents or guardians do not object to it, the reading of the Bible in parish schools-and the Bible, when read in parish schools by Roman Catholic children shall, if required by their parents or guardians, be the Douay version, without note or comment. Mr. COSTIGAN said that, before placing in the hands of Mr. SPEAKER the motion which he intended to move in reference to the New Brunswick School Law, and on which he would ask the House to vote, he desired to offer some remarks to explain why he expected hon. members would vote in favor of the proposition which he would submit. He believed if he was justified in 1872 in moving a resolution on this subject, and raising a discussion thereon, there was greater reason for action at the present time; if he believed he had a right to claim the sympathy and assistance of the Dominion Parliament at that time on this question, hon. members must admit that the necessity for their aid existed to a greater extent to-day. At the risk of being thought somewhat It was true that hon. members might tedious, he felt called upon to thoroughly arrive at different conclusions as to the discuss the question, because he felt he true meaning of this section. The hon. would not be discharging his duty if he did member for South Bruce in his speech in not repeat any important matters that had 1872 seemed to be forcibly struck by the occurred in previous debates for the infor-wording of this Act, for he said :— Mo Domville. |