HETEROGENEITY OF OPPOSITION

407

opposition was being offered in Montreal, by Mr. John Dougall, of the Witness. And, while referring to the opponents of Federation, he could not help adverting to the strange manner in which extremes met and worked in unison to oppose Federation. For instance, we had the party who formerly composed what might be styled Mr. Papineau's Tail-the extreme democratic partyjoined with Mr. Dougall's Tail. This scheme, he repeated, met with the approval of all moderate men. The extreme men, the socialists, democrats and annexationists were opposed to it. The French Canadian opponents of the project were, it appeared, afraid that their religious rights would suffer under the new arrangement. Fancy the celebrated Institut Canadien, of Montreal, under the lead of citizen Blanchet, taking religion under their protection! Mr. Dougall loudly proclaimed that the British Protestant minority would be entirely placed at the mercy of the French Canadians. He (Cartier) thought the arguments of the young French gentlemen belonging to the national democratic party who cried out that their religion and nationality would be destroyed, ought in all reason to be sufficient to satisfy the scruples and calm the fears of Mr. Dougall. The True Witness, which was also one of the enemies of the scheme, said that if it were adopted the French Canadians were doomed; while his brother in violence, the Witness, said that the Protestants were doomed. At a meeting recently held in Montreal on the subject, he observed that Mr. Cherrier had enrolled himself among the enemies of the project. Well, this fine, quiet, old gentleman announced that he had come out of his political retirement for the purpose of opposing Federation. All he could say was that he never knew Mr. Cherrier was a strong politician. However, it appeared that he had come out once more on the political stage for the purpose of opposing this villainous scheme, which was intended to destroy the nationality and religion of the French Canadians-all brought about by that confounded Cartier! Allusion had been made to the opinion of the clergy. Well, he would say that the opinion of the clergy was for Confederation. Those who were high in authority, as well as those who occupied more humble positions, were in favour of Federation, not only because they saw in it so much security for all they held dear, but because it was just to their Protestant fellow-subjects as well,

because they were opposed to political bickering and strife. This opposition to a state of political dissension and trouble was the general feeling of the clergy, and because they saw in Confederation a solution of those difficulties which had existed for some time, due regard being had to just rights, they were favourable to the project. The fact, however, was that when we saw such extreme opponents as Mr. Clerk, of the True Witness, Mr. Dougall, of the Witness, and the young gentlemen of the Institut Canadien combined to resist Confederation, because each party argued it would produce the most widely different results-we might look upon this fact, he repeated, as one of the strongest arguments in favour of Confederation. We had, on the other hand, all the moderate men, all that was respectable and intelligent, including the clergy, favourable to Federation. He did not, of course, mean to say that there were not respectable opponents to the project-what he did mean, however, was that it met general approval from the classes referred to.

He was opposed, he might as well state most distinctly, to the democratic system which obtained in the United States. In this country of British North America we should have a distinct form of government, the characteristic of which would be to possess the monarchical element. When we had Confederation secured, there was not the least doubt but that our Government would be more respectable-that it would have more prestige, and command more respect from our neighbours. The great want under the American form—the point which they all admitted formed the great defect— was the absence of some respectable executive element. How was the head of the United States Government chosen? Candidates came forward, and of course each one was abused and villified as corrupt, ignorant, incapable and unworthy by the opposite party. One of them attained the presidential chair; but even while in that position he was not respected by those who had opposed his election, and who tried to make him appear the most corrupt and contemptible being in creation. Such a system could not produce an executive head who would command respect. Under the British system ministers might be abused and assailed; but that abuse never reached the Sovereign. Whether we were made a

INCREASE OF TRADE

409

kingdom or a viceroyalty—whatever name or grade was assigned to us-we would undoubtedly have additional prestige. He would now conclude his remarks by asking honourable gentlemen to consider well this scheme. It was his hope, his cherished hope, that it would be adopted by the House. The time was opportune, as his honourable colleague had so ably stated last evening; the opportunity might never offer itself again in such a facile and propitious manner. We knew we had, in all our proceedings, the approbation of the Imperial Government. So if these resolutions were adopted by Canada, as he had no doubt they would, and by the other Colonial Legislatures, the Imperial Government would be called upon to pass a measure which would have for its effect to give a strong central or general government and local governments, which would at once secure and guard the persons, the properties and the civil and religious rights belonging to the population of each section.

Hon. Mr. Galt: It is a matter for regret on the part of all of us that the trade between these colonies-subject all to the same Sovereign, connected with the same empire-has been so small. Intercolonial trade has been, indeed, of the most insignificant character; we have looked far more to our commercial relations with the neighbouring-though a foreign,-country, than to the interchange of our own products, which would have retained the benefits of our trade within ourselves; hostile tariffs have interfered with the free interchange of the products of the labour of all the colonies, and one of the greatest and most immediate benefits to be derived from their union will spring from the breaking down of these barriers and the opening up of the markets of all the provinces to the different industries of each. In this manner we may hope to supply Newfoundland and the great fishing districts of the Gulf, with the agricultural productions of Western Canada; we may hope to obtain from Nova Scotia our supply of coal; and the manufacturing industry of Lower Canada may hope to find more extensive outlets in supplying many of those articles which are now purchased in foreign markets. For instance, Newfoundland produces scarcely anything by agriculture, manufactures hardly an article of clothing, and a considerable trade may thus be expected to arise; while, instead of having payments made, as they

are now, through Lombard Street, they will be made through our own bankers in Montreal and elsewhere. If we require to find an example of the benefits of free commercial intercourse, we need not look beyond the effects that have followed from the working of the Reciprocity Treaty with the United States. In one short year from the time when that treaty came into operation, our trade in the natural productions of the two countries swelled from less than $2,000,000 to upwards of $20,000,000 per annum, and now, when we are threatened with an interruption of that trade-when we have reason to fear that the action of the United States will prove hostile to the continuance of free commercial relations with this country-when we know that the consideration of this question is not grounded on just views of the material advantages resulting to each country-but that the irritation connected with political events exercises a predominant influence over the minds of American statesmen,1 it is the duty of the House to provide, if possible, other outlets for our productions. If we have reason to fear that one door is about to be closed to our trade, it is the duty of the House to endeavour to open another; to provide against a coming evil of the kind feared by timely expansion in another direction; to seek by free trade with our own fellow-colonists for a continued and uninterrupted commerce which will not be liable to be disturbed at the capricious will of any foreign country. On this ground, therefore, we may well come to the conclusion that the union between these colonies is demanded alike on account of their extensive resources, and because of the peculiar position in which they stand relatively to each other, to Great Britain, and to the United States. All these are questions which fall within the province of the General Government, as proposed in the resolutions before the House, and whatever may be the doubts and fears of any one with respect to the details of the organization by which it is proposed to work the new system of Confederation, no one can doubt that the great interests of trade and commerce will be best promoted and developed by being entrusted to

1 One of the chief reasons for the American denunciation of the Reciprocity Treaty was anger at Canadian manifestations of sympathy with the South during the Civil War.

HISTORY OF MOVEMENT

411

one central power, which will wield them in the common interest.1

Hon. George Brown: It is with no ordinary gratification I rise to address the House on this occasion. I cannot help feeling that the struggle of half a life-time for constitutional reform-the agitations in the country, and the fierce contests in this chamber—the strife and the discord and the abuse of many years, are all compensated by the great scheme of reform which is now in your hands. The Attorney-General for Upper Canada, as well as the Attorney-General for Lower Canada, in addressing the House last night, were anxious to have it understood that this scheme for uniting British America under one government, is something different from "representation by population,"-is something different from "joint authority," but is in fact the very scheme of the Government of which they were members in 1858. Now, sir, it is all very well that my honourable friends should receive credit for the large share they have contributed towards maturing the measure before the House; but I could not help reflecting while they spoke, that if this was their very scheme in 1858, they succeeded wonderfully in bottling it up from all the world except themselves, and I could not help regretting that we had to wait till 1864 until this mysterious plant of 1858 was forced to fruition. For myself, sir, I care not who gets the credit of this scheme,-I believe it contains the best features of all the suggestions that have been made in the last ten years for the settlement of our troubles; and the whole feeling in my mind now is one of joy and thankfulness that there were found men of position and influence in Canada who, at a moment of serious crisis, had nerve and patriotism enough to cast aside political partisanship, to banish personal considerations, and unite for the accomplishment of a measure so fraught with advantage to their common country. It was a bold step in the then existing state of public feeling for many members of the House to vote for the Constitutional Committee moved for by me last session-it was a very bold step for many of the members of that committee to speak

1 Galt was at this time Finance Minister. The remainder of his speech was devoted to a statement of the arrangements made for taking over the debts of the colonies, and of the economies made possible by Federation.