CIHM Microfiche Series (IMonographs) ICIMH Collection de microfiches (monographies) Canadian inttituta for Historical Microroproductiont / institut Canadian da microraproductions historiquas Technical and Bibliographic Notes / Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming are checked bekm. n n D D n n D Coloured covers / Couverture de couleur Covers damaged / Couverture endommag^ Covers restored and/or laminated / Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicula Cover title missing / Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps / Cartes g^raphiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black) / Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations / Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material / Re\\6 avec d'autres documents Only edition available / Seule Edition disponible Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin / La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion le long de la marge int^rieure. Blank leaves added during restorations may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming / Use peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6X6 filmdes. Additional comments / Commentaires suppldmentaires: L'Institut a microfiimd le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6X6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exem- plaire qui sont peut-«tre unkfues du point de vue bibli- ographkfue, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modifk»tion dans la m^tho- de normale de filmage sont indiqute ci-dessous. I I CokMjredpajes/ Pages de couleur I I Pages damaged / Pages endommagtes D Pages restored and/or laminated / Pages restaur^es et/ou peilicul^es Q Pages discotoured, stained or foxed / Pages dteolor6es, tachetdes ou piques |v/| Pages detached / Pages d^tach^es I \/f Showthrough/ Transparence r~V Quality of print varies / n D Quality inhale de I'impression Includes supplementary material / Comprend du materiel suppl^mentaire Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc.. have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image / Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 filmtes k nouveau de fa^on k obtenir la meilleure intage possible. Opposing pages with varying colouration or discolourations are filmed twice to ensure the best possible image / Les pages s'opposant ayant des colorations variables ou des decolorations sont filmtes deux fois afin d'obtenir la meilleLv . image possible. This HMD to f ilnwd at ttw raduction ratio ctMclwd balow / Ca documant aat film* au taux da rMuction indiqu* el H -BY- «r. J. P. WHITNEY, K.C. n •f th« OonaMifAtIv* Opposition The Bill Reispectjltij: the Retail Sate of Intoxiasiiins: Liquor otti;! (i,'i-,y .■f->:i!-'- Uuch 8^ 1903, oa ||« Swond R«idli« of Ob BU ^im : ^,^ 4Ur« tii# In OntwrlOk no*uM b« •f tki 1% tM Manttob* inium- mmt, wMoh H la |ir«. "*~ Is not prohibition, nor anything Ilin "^^ proporly tormocl an aot to prwIUMt In hotolfc n pormlto tho iinlntai i iiplog In tho Provinoo^ antf ito trhnloeaio aiam trth9 Pi ^ » h i o o toy a«onto« ofOntarla,- nrt>M Gkt,,/m. m, iya*. ^mmf/mf"^^ ^mm THE opposmoi ON THE 5^ In th« d«bat« en th« Mcond r«adinir of th« Bill relating to th« liquor traflle. Mr. Whitney, In reply to the Hon. Mr. Roee, epoke as follows i Mr. 8p«rter:— It to a matter not unplMwant to the ordinary ob»erver. 1 apprehend, to noUce the Jaunty manner In which my honoraWe Wend (Hon. O. W. Rom) approaches the oonelderatlon of thtt queetlon which has occu- pied hto days and nights for I forget how many months past, and And that since the matter was last discussed In this House he has received testimon- ials, so to speak, of approbation of his legislation from all possible parties In the State. The extreme prohibitionists, my learned friend says, naturally ex- pected something different, and I agree with the honorable gentleman. Those who were In the liquor business thought the bill was an Improper bill, and then between the two there was a large group of persons who also thought that perhaps this bill might not be Just what was expected, but my honor- able friend had the agreeable Intelligence to announce to the House that sll these cUP^ea approve of his bill. (Laughter.) What more has the bonorafcle gentleman to fear? What more has he to hesitate about with reference to any of the details of thU bill? My honorable friend can extract sunbeams from cucumbers, on the slightest warning. His cheerfulness reminds me of a gentleman who was once known to be of a very optimistic turn of mind, and the drcumsUnces which surrounded him from time to time had nothing to do with his l>earing towards the occurrences which were going on, or with his mentai attitude at the time, and so at a funeral one day this gentleman marched Into the room where the remains were stationed, and while he noted the expansive expression of sorrow and lamentation which was abroad In the room he felt It his duty to cheer up all and sundry concerned, and out of the fullness of his heart he said, " It is a nice quiet corpse." (Lauffhter.) 80 he comes to-day with the echoes of the thunders of the denunciations of the liquor men last night In his ears (applause), with the echoes of the denuncia- tions of the extreuM prohibitionists— always excepting Mr. John J. Maclaren. of course— (laughter), and my hon. friend excels Mark Tapley, wlio, under all conceivable circumstances was determined to be Jolly. (Laughter.) 1 hope I shall be enabled In the discussion of this question to-day to do so In a reasonable way, and to do so without taking up any laiger portion of the time of the House than I reasonably can; and I want to approach the discussion of this quistlon, Mr. Speaker, In the first place In this manner: My conclusion Is that In considering the second reading of a bill of this de- scription we find ourselves face to face with a situation of the utmost gravity and seriousness. The situation Is gravo and serious both because of the na- ture and possibly far-reaching consequences and effects of the measure we 2 ^mw^ '^jiit an atent to dlaeoM, a quMtton than which no mora Importent on* can on its aarita oall tor tha attention of b -preMnUtlve Atatmblr: and btrana* or tka flaet t!nt tor tha flrat time iha history of raaponalMa Oorerrmaat. aecordlnt tu our British ajrateni on this continent, and Indeed elsewhere as far aa my knowledca aervea me, It Is proposed by responsible Ministers of the Crown, deliberately to abdicate their functions and reft se and repudiate the raspoBSlbllity which up to the present day has been not only acknowledged and admitted, but cheerfully accepted by hon. rentlemen In their position hara and elsewhere under British rule. The clrcuristancee surroundlni this question have been and are of a peculiar nature, not cnly with reference to the purposes of the bill, and to the hon. rentleman who wsa responsible for the proposed legislation, but also for the peculiar and unusual nature of tha i»athods by which the .lupstlon Is to be decided. It Is not often that a political leader has become Identified In a personal sense, and practically ftor a tanaratlon, with an Important public que* tlnn, having regard to the merits of tha question and latterly to pledges and promises made by himself and by others whose political assignee and successor he Is. MR. ROt^S' RECORD IN DODOINO PROHIBITION. It may be well, therefore, to trace as rapidly as may be tha connection of the Hon. Leader of the Government and his Party with this question of abating or abolishing the drInJc evil In this country. During his whole pub- lic and political career. Indeed for upwards of thirty years the hon. gentle- man has had at his back the great bulk of those who believe In draatlo mea- sures with relation to this question. We cheerfully admit hhti to be the pos- sessor of talents above the avsrage. which. In the ordinary course of events would have assured to mm tha attainment of a high position li public life In this country; but, sir, he, for the reasons I have given, rode on the crest of the wave for many years with reference to this question. In order not to be misunderstood, let me say here In my opinion the hon. gentleman deserves credit for his early efforts In the direction I have Indicated, and credit which I am quite willing to accord him. Now. sir, let us go back. If you please to the year W77. My hon. friend had then been for a number of years In pub- lic life, a trusted representative of his party, a valued representative of his party In the House of Commons; one who had received the strong support of the class In this community of ours which I have alluded to Just now, and by means of that support had had his way made easy to the realisation of his hopes and desires, namely a seat In the House of Commons of the Do- mlnlcn of Canada. My hon. friend's party was In power, a large majority sat there to the right of the Speaker, prepared to support the Qovemment of the day; the situation was a very desirable one from the point of view of any great moral question, and one would I ave taken that opportunity at any rate, to have made use of the abilities which had been given to him In order to pay back to the people who had put him there something, at least, of the debt Which ho owed to them, and i>f wMch I am sure he will not to-day deny the existence. But, what occurred in 1877 in the House of Commons at Ottawa? At that time the Hon. nr. Schultz, a member of that House, proposed the folk>wlng resolution: That in the opinion of this House a prohlhltor.v liqnor law Is the only effectual remedy for the erll of Intemperance, and that It la the duty of the Ooremment to submit inch a measure at the earliest moment practicable. Now, sir, 1 believe, as far as my recollection goes that that resolution cx- prersed In as few words and In as curt and clear a manner the object which Its promoter had In view as !t was possible to have done by means of any resolution In our Bngllsh language. I have yet to learn, sir, that while there are many people who believed In the past and who may ballave to-day, that 3 tiM jsriadletleB ovtr tbia qoutlun raata with Um DomtatOB QormnuMM, aM wUto Umn at* • grMt many otkani who btltov* atoo to-day that th« Jnrladlc- tton raata with tha Prorlndal Oovammant. I havt navar yat haard of any man of aundlnt or rtputa In thia country who said tha Domlnloa (lov- ammant had no Jurtadictton at all over the manufacture and aala of aleo- hoUo llqoora, and I naver will hear any each eUtemant from any rapoUble iMkn, bacauaa It la beyond the poeelblllty of doubt or quaatlon. no matter wtiat the Jurlidlctton might have been It waa quIU evident, aa It la now avl- dMit and proved, that the Dominion Parliament waa aetied of Jurladlotkon, at any rata of aome kind, with reference to tha manufacture and aala and Iia- portatton and exportation of Intoxlratlnir llquora In thIa country, and there- fore no matter what caee caee might be broicht before the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Cour'., no matter what Utlsatlon might be propoaed to Im eent to tVie Judicial Committee of Hla Majeety'e PrSvy Council, at the aame time thIa Jurisdiction reeted In tha Dominion Oovemment. the Dominion Parliament, and there could have been no excuse whatever for thoee having the great sub- ject at heart not making an attempt to orystrJlUa their views Into leglala- tlon on the Statute Book of Canada (Opposition applause.) And ao, sir, Dr. Bchulta thought, and he brought forward the resolution which I have al- luded to. BLOCKED PROHIBITION IN 1S77. Now, sir, the hon. gentleman, the leader of this Oorarnmant, moved at that time the following amendment: When as gmre doubU exlr 'nad I notice, In tho reports In BanMUd, following the words " grsve donbt»," there are the words, " l")nloBl cheers "), whereas grare doubts exist whether, nudtr the proTlslons of I lie British North America Aet, 188T, this House has the power to deal with the sale of Intoxicating liquors as a bever- sitp: and whereas the Court of Krrnr niid Appoal In the Provlnre of Ontario^ haa referred a case to the Snpremr Cimrt, wiitToby the relative Jnilsdl tlon of the Pro- vincial and Dominion LecUlatui-es uvrr the liquor trafBe will be argued, be It therefore resolved that this House, while not receding from anr previous declaration on the Importnnre of a prohlMtorr liquor law, deeems It Inexpedient under these Hi ciimstances at present to express any opinion rpRarrtliiK the srtlon to lie taken by the Govpmmci't lu dealing with this question. That la the amendment which waa moved by my hon. friend (Hon. O. W. Ross), when the Hon. Dr. Schults endeavored In hla own way to bring this question before the Parliament of Canada for decision. In order, that ' he could have his way a prohibitory law should be passed; the hon. gen^ - man got up and stood In the doorway and prevented Dr. Schults from bringing In hla mea«ure. (Opposition cheers.) At that time, and I am quoting ftom Hansard now, my hon. friend spoke as follows: III <>rd«T to satisfy himself that no uiironsonnliie rtolny would o<-cur by not put- ting any resolution oii the paper this Hession. hr |)lii<-«>d himsolf lu c«, the qdestlon of Jurisdiction. In this correspondence he ascertained that It was th>>ir Intention In the case which had been appealed recently from the Court of Krror and .Appeal to nven op the wbole question of the jurisdiction of the Provincial Legislature. Now, rir. that waa the attitude which my honorable friend aasumed with regard to this question In 1877. Of course there are evil disposed men in this country, Conservatives and others, no doubt. who have suggested from time to time that the principal object the hon. gentleman had In view was to protect the Mackeniie .Qovwnment, of which he was a supporter, from the possible consequencea of any sudden legislation on the great question of prohibition. However that 4 'J mmm mmm ' »•, I do not propoM to dwoll upon tlwt phuo of tho aitmtloa. W» ilMll BOW, Mr. RpMktr, makt a lonv jump from l«77 to IWl f^ Hxtora tone iT."* ^!*'.^ ""^ '*°"' '^•"** "•• «»«'»«-n«4. at any rato, no hand was llft- •d to abate this torribl* •vll which haa for ao Inn* occupiad thia poattlon In tha Provlnca of Ontarto. For half a canaratlon In tha Provlnca of Ontario tna prtaant leadar of this OovemmMit made no attempt to brine about that auta of attalra. tha daalrablllty of which haa b«*n tha text of hia ad- Z^aV^ ^*" *""• ** ""• •*" ^^* »~"'*' platform and In tha Houm of Parlla- ^ml-'jr"' '^ *""*' *•**• ''•"^ "^'^y- *"" ■>«•• ■««n« "'^ »h«n "«> "• ^ . -!?! Indllfarwica of tha apoatlaa of thl^ movamant *ho ara will- «n« to ait m public offlca and enjoy the fruition thereof while th9 widowa and orphan* atao d and dSad aa theretofore. paa«ln» over that, 1 aay we so on for Mxteen yeara, and we And thAt In 1S93 my hon. friend who alta here to my left i.K ***"•'■> ■""««* "P "»• altuatlon. if you will allow me to uae the word, witn a very Ion* pole Indeed, and my hon. frien.l waa then awakened from !-,!.?"^"* *'*"''• •" ^'*'*"* "• "** "^n •leePlng away the Ume. in the mldat of and aurrounded by the fat of ,he land until he waa forced to take Boroe action by the bill of my hon. fHend here from North Toronto (Mr. Mar- BIMU^AR COURSE IN 1893. Now. air. there waa a Government In power here In 18»3. the hon. gentle- man waa a member of that Oovernment. and ro It aeemed whatever waa the reaaon of hIa action in 1877 a aimllarlty of motive, apparently exlated when we come to consider hIa action In 1898. There «a. not only a Orlt Oovernment lo protect, but It waa a Oovernment of which he ivaa a member, and therefore ^f Tv ,* "!*"""• Incentive to protect that Oovernment from the coneequencea !.. * ' '^ '*'"' ^'"^"^ " '•="* "^**' "»^ »» '»"' principle, which he had .aid aJI public men ought to act upon. So. when my hon. friend to my left (Mr. .k! ! .. T*^*""** *"" *"" ^^^''^ provided .Imply for the .hutting off of v™./!!^ ' ^ "'•«"«=» aright, on May l.t. 189.3. the hon. gentleman. .Ir. your predece..or In thl. chair (Mr. Balfour), who.e Iom. we all lament, moved mlfi: ?.* ! '^•'■"•ut'on: •• That the bill be read a .econd time thl. day three ^?nl !' /1i.*1f" ■*"'"^'' "* '"^ '»•**"•" •f^nt'^'^an K»t up m hi. place. Demg actuated by hIa view of the motion to throw out thl. bill by a three ins nolat, and on the .pur of the moment produced a typewritten amend- i Of three foolscap pag«a (Oppoaltlon cheer.) and that. sir. I am afraid . *IH have to trouble you to listen to a. follow.: l.itlon'lL!mt !!!*? "' ""T? "" •""" °' "•' I'rovlnclnl Leslnlature. to eim...t a ,.r..l.|. Indlne h.f„« .h" ^r""'*'"* """ """"> « "n>"*«» >•»'*" of thl. ch..not.r 1. now l»endlnK before the Siipereme Court of C.maUn:- JJrr™.?J*'^t*"*' »*""•"«•" recognlte the echo of the word, that went down through the corrldora of the Houae of Commons sixteen long years before? Ir^m.'luTlZ" ""*"":""f *•> •"«" *'♦«' tho .,..c8tlon of the prohibition of the liquor th"* to d?a. With th^ ^,'" """ ^"'"'"" *^"^"'"" °' ""' '<"•"" '» that be'.alf; .Jrill..i,re f. . douht T "'/'*•"'""<'" »-• ""I whll,. the jurUdlctlou of mlht«e aS.. .h. T^l """ ""="""» ''"""'. •" ^e opinion of thl» llonse. UcaS rJlS 1^ .„ ,„T TT"" " """'"«•"=« """ <" th- public, and «ould prac Is wnM^ce that '" '7 "°'°''** """ '""''^''»**«> t^^'c in liquor.; that thl, Ho««. ^ ♦•!! ? . ..^ *"* ^""'"""t of «uch Jn.llclal tribunal a. to the extent if any of the jurl«ilctlon of the Provincial Legl.laturc to enact a law for the total «; 5 ■# ^ MMM m MMw 9t Ik* HfMt tftCta. Ual If aa*! wkM It ilMll k* •«}ii«gi« kf HNM will to ff*»w.« t. ««»uwf ud 4.fi 1. .iH.. •".» .rr:r«^^ .Ttto MUM M7 to bnHkt tofoN It. ttot for rMM»i .lottMld tW. U«~« » "^ l^l.l.lur» slumM Mt to f.rlb»r dMit with durim tto pr^t •^■' *'* ^tiT Mcopt to Mito >.d tuet all nnwMry pro.tolf - for ■^'••« " ,r!!l*!^tairt» riu o> tto Que.tl.m of Ibt pwhIWtlo. of tto Mid trtWc. and tWa »»»«7 *^'f^ ordor* tbiit th. Mid Mil I* not mw rtad a awoii.l tlirn-. but to rMd a atwwa .u— tbia dar rli montba. ^. Milotti ■truisa how th«M aocldtnta will hapimtl itraiitt how I^ -^ ^^ quaatloo. may to dMlt with In th« moat d.llb«»t*ly trtfllnif «»^' ™ tha Mtora d*»lliic with thorn koop loi>« and ataady ""'■**""!I^. ^'yory tho hon. fMiUamna than Introduood aomathlnt which ho »«•*,»•'• ■Thtocito •orry for Unco. via., that faarful and wondorful V"^^^^^*^ XI^ZTZ^ and th* hon. gmtlaman I tolloYa. ha* oftantlma. •Ine* '••'^ S^. Jd 1 touchad th* ptoblacit* or had anything to do with th* »"°|r" "J^^jj^- don't wond*r. air, at hi* dlacuat, although w* «iay ''^.■•'"•„'^^^7. •von acklnat our tott*r common a*.-o. that wa ar* •nt«'**'"'°« "^ "^.w. awa<«a. my hon. frt*nd did not look forward a* h* ou«ht to h»T* doM^ »• thouctat tb* p«>pl* who had allowed him to alumtor for •«»«^"^y roUtion to the dlacuaMon of thl. .raat queatlon *»">*"*'* .'^^^^^TT^ what tonv piM. with r.f.r.nc* to It In the future, and h* ""»* *";^';^ he advo t-d th* pl*blaclU In IIM that Nemeala would com* horn* to him wiw the thinr ^alled th* rafarendum. (Oppoaltlon ch**r*.) MR. BOBS* FORMBB DB8CMPTION OF THB PRBBWNT MU* Uot m* quote my hon. frlond a«aln-and I will aay thla ««: ""»• "1JJ| oucht to to aald for him, that when ha make, a atatemant whl^ » ™ down and printed you will alway. find that what th* •»»»•""» J" '^*!; to mean I. pretty clearly *xpra.aed-h*ro la *»»»* ™y.»'"V„,'J**^ ^ thl. d.bat* on the aecond reading, which he •»«^««»t J^L^^iirutSi of had aucceeded alxteen yeara tofor* In abutting off tha propo**d tagtoUtlon '^•wto*l"IS"prnpo«c to a.k I. not. .h«.. we prohibit tb. reUll .ale of '"to^Jj-tlof HQOor., tbat wouM be but a .mall matter, .he bar-room, are bad enoogh 0«^ /"^J; but Ibe, are not ... bad a. th. .anteen In th. private bo.o... J"*« **• 'l*^^^ tragic wa* prohlMted there would be p*r.nUt.d that *'»»'*••'• »~"<',;i''JJ'^,, reault Id a man carrying hi. demljchn home by nlgbt and drinking It with kla wll. at bla own flrMlde. (Oppo.ttlon cb«>r..) And. .h. what wa. the hon. gentleman de.crlblng In to«|* wortot H* wa. d*«:riblng word for word, line for line and letter for letUr th* WU. tt* Mcond reading of which he had moved to-day ^'^^^'^'Z^^'Tf-'^ JJ th* aecond reading of which he moved to-day, and for which h* dare not M •um* the responalblllty. con.tl' tlonally .peaking. I. pracUcaUy i. ^Ul to troduced by my friend rror th Toronto (Mr. Marter). ^^^\^ ^"^^ truthfully m the language I have Juat quoted here. Now air. let » ^ on a little further. In 1893. alxteen yeara had paa.ed of thla long waiting to toe wlldeme... and then we had In 1895. and I do not ^'''^J^J^^^'^^.^^J;; talUi hlatory of that, the Judgment of the Judicial Committee of th* PrWy Suncll. and nothing wa. done upon It. There are ^^f jjj "^i^^c^ lmpo»lble to aay what the meaning of '»»e Judgment of the JudlcW «^ mltte* of the Privy Council waa. Well. sir. If I were the leader of th*. wv Trlrt o?the province of Ontario I would not -" '^ jj* ^^ wTi mlttee of the Privy Council of England to tell me what their meanlr4^ wa* i ThoS; auimlt It to the people and atand or fall by It (Oppoaltlon ch**r..) 6 IIP t ■' > ■AUB or UQCCR IN HALT Plim. I cMwot pa« by tiMU aptood* la Wfl, I think U was, wtacr* tb* taw wM etaaaatd to tli« 'toMUon It ooouplas t»>4«T. Th* taw wm chufftd by tb« bon. gmttaiMB and itlll rraialM la fore*. Undar that ehaac* a Morokoopar who has a llccasa may lell on«-half plat of aplrlti to any man or boy la thto oonatrr of oura. (Oi>pooltlon choera.) I aay th« hon. goatlaman has poaad. aad I aay It air. almrMt with faa utd trambllas. p«opto hava bsMi fouad to thoak Ood he ban posed aa th* le^dar of th* tamparaac* aoaUnaat aad tant paraaca alament In thta province. (Oppoaltlon chaara) Oaa-ha»f plat of aplrita by reason of the amendment io that effect Introdaoad by tha leader a* thia Gtovemment can be sold by any llcenaed atorekeaper la the Province of Ontario t3-day, and atlll we are asked to follow my hon. friaad aa tha leader of tha Umpenuice movement In thIa province of oura! (OppoaltUn chaara.) Tha judrmant of the Privy Council waa la 1I»B, and aavan yeara hava atapaed and what have we got? I shall allude preaently to on* or two thine* that hava taken place durtn* all these yaars. but In the meantime seven yeai* have elapasd, and at the end of the seven years, even as Jacob hoped to obtain Rachaal— ao our tamperanca frlonds havf hopwl to receive that fror / hon- orable friend which he has been promiolnr them for a geaeraU'- i •. :_M\o life, only to nnd In the end that they are not sura oC It tma at r • xplra- tlon of fourteen yeara. Now, sir. we And certain promloaa wer* m.^fi toy th* honorable gm Meman and his predecessors, and he jald In hia remarka to-day he would ha." :/8en very wronr If he had precipitated a bill upon th* puMIc mind at this time. Why, sir, since my honorable friend her* at my taft (Hr. Marter) Introduced his bill nine years have elapsed. Can It b* urv*d with any success by any peraon In this Houne or out of It, that this great quasUon has been, abatnit from the public mind at all .or tha last eight or tan y**r»T I think the hon. gentleman will rtnd in the end that his Judgment, at any rat*, was not good when he took this Manitoba Art, not feeling able or wlllln*, whichever It may be. to draft a pn>per one himself, and aaked thta I^ctota- tur* to pass It. and hand It on to the people, a law by which amonc other thinga— and what I am about to allude to Is a copy word for word In thla bill of ours to-day— a law by which, amoag other things. It Is provided that a veterinary surgeon may purchase two gallons of spirits at a tlm*. and In another se::tlon he shall only h*ve one gallon ^ hIa possession! (lAughtsr aad cheers.) DISTINCT PFOMl.^BS TO PROHIBITIONISTS. Very well, Mr. Speaker, we com* nown to th* promise*. Her* ta what the Olob* saya waa the pro- u. -» made b.. '"i- Oliver Mowat:— If tho decUlon of the Priv» Council ».^nulcS t* tliit tho province bat the Jurtsdlc- tlon to paMi It prohibitory liquor law «• to hrIc, I will Introduce such a bill at the folIowInK i»«"'iilon. If I am at the head of the Oo^erument. If the de<:Ulon of the Privy Co'incU la that the province haa Jurisdiction to paa* '.n'.y a partial prohibitory law, I will Introduce auch a bill as the decision will wurrant, nnleaa the partial prohibitory power la ao limited aa to be JnefTectlve from a temperance atandpolnt. Did Sir Oliver Mowat say that h* would Introduce a law and pass It on to th* p«ople to vote for It? Not one word of auch Intention, and Sir Oliver Mowat was too good a constitutionalist, a man of too good an Instinct as far aa public life Is concerned, to trust himself to any such foolish proposition. Now, then, there was a loophole in the end of this promise by which my hon- orable friend might have escaped r he had seen fit. Sir Oliver Mowat aald:- 7 I will iBtradnM raeh • bill at tb« (otloTvIng aenloB If I an at th« head of tb« Oorenu&Mit. If the decision of the Privy Council la that the proTlnce has Jurisdic- tion to pass only a partial prohibitory law, I will Introduce such a bill as the decision will warrant unless tb«- parila) prohibitory power is so limited as to be ineSectWe from a temperance standpoint. What does he mean by that ? " I shall decide in my own mind whether it will be IneflCectlve from a temperance standpoint, and if It will be ineffec- tive according to my mind. I wUl not Introduce such a bill." Now, then, my honorable friend cannot escape the responsibility, no man can who occu- pies the position of a Minister of the Crown. If he says to-day that he believes this bill would be Ineffective, then under the terms of that promise he should never have Introduced It, because that promise had at the end of it a saving clause by which if in the opinion of the giver of the promise partial prohibition would be ineifectlve from a temperance standpoint, he would not have put himself about to introduce such a prohibitory law. I think my honorable friend would have done wisely, no matter which side of the question he had taken, because the people, sir, in my opinion, respect and believe in those who have no hesitation In expressing their true opinions and their sentiments on any subject. (Opposition cheers.) My honorable friend on the same authority then said, • The verdict of the people bas been acocptbd l.y the Oovcioment partially and by me gladly. It is what it ought to do, and It Is the only kind of Goremment 1 would be a member of." .. v°° February 20th of this year Mr. Ross is reported as having said: 'Tou know what our past record has been, and what our predecessors nave agreed to, and what is the general policy of the Government upon that question ? That need not be repeated over and ovei again, because you know exactly where we stand." ORIGIN OP THE HOSS REFERENDUM. When was this Idea of a referendum first heard of ? Why, sir, a couple of days after the decision of the Privy Council was announced a couple of feelers were thrown out through the public press, by supporters of the hon- orable genUeman, in order to see what view the public would take of this referendum. Did Sir Oliver Mowat say there would be a referendum ? Sir Oliver Mowat was a precise man, a man of detail, and he said: " I will Introduce a bill of such and such a nature." Does the honorable gentleman mean to assert that if Sir Oliver Mowat had had In his mind any idea of any further proceedings he would not have expressed It then ? Will the honorable gentleman himself say that when he endorsed Sir Oliver Mowafs promise that he then had in his mind any Buch thing as Is called to-day the referendum. In regard to this bill'? Now, then, sir, I come to the speech of the honorable gentleman the other day, a remarkable speech In many respects, one which could be followed easily and the meaning of which it was not difficult to observe. As he went on from the question of the municipalities he sald-and this is not a matter over which there Is any contention at all, though 1 think he is mistaken about one or two statements here with reference to ihe comparative conditions of Ontario and Quebec-that 20 per cent, of the municipalities in Ontario were without tavern licenses, and that the convictions for drunkenness in Quebec were nearly double those in Ontario. I do not know what the figures show, and I do not care, because the figures of statistics in regard to some questions are utterly unreliable. There may be a wave of temperance sentiment going o%'er a county in consequence of which everybody found drunk on the streets may be arrested, and the opposite state of affairs may exist in an adjoining 8 pvr IV county, and there m»y be no arreats, and yet more dninkenneaa. I want to ■ay this, there la lesa drinUns of aplrita In the Province of Quebec relatlYOly to the number of people than In the Province of Ontario, and I will venture to tay without having the llgurea by my aide here, that there are double the number of municipalities in the Province of Quebec, without reUll li- censes, than there are In the Province of Ontario without reUU licenses. I don't know how It affects thU question, but I did not think It was my duty to allow the statement to go by, when It really worked an Injustice to the Province of Quebec. NO PRBCEJDENTS FOR THE REFERENDUM. Now. we come to this word, or expresBlon, or system, or scheme, this un- failing remedy for politicians in distress on that side of the House, at any rate, called the referendum. The honorable sentleman made some remark- able statements In his speech the other day, statements I was surprised to hear him make. He is usually careful and precise. He us- ually takes all proper steps to have a proper foundation for the remarks he may make on any great question, but there Is one of two conclusions which I must come to with reference to his speech the other day. One is he intended to deceive his listeners, and the other Is he had not studied up the question and spoke through Ignorance rather than knowledge. I take the latter one, of couise, because I cannot come to the former, but I propose to prove the truth of what I have stated Just now. He cited in favor of the referendum the question of municipal bylaws in this country; he also cited a llquo bill introduced by Sir William Har- court, one that was favored by Mr. Joseph Chamberlain, and he also cited Chief Justice Cooley, of the United States, with reference to the Idea of the referendum. Now, I ask honorable gentlemen to follow me for a short time, and 1 will show how utterly inconsequent the speech or argu- ment of my honorable friend was, and I make this statement here and now, and I stand or fall by it in the minds of those equally able to Judge with myself, that no statement made by him with reference to the referendum was applicable, or if it was applicable, was correctly stated. (Opposition cheers.) We all know that in municipal by-laws providing for the raising of dums of money there is no principle involved, there Is no great moral prin- ciple upon which the people are asked to pronounce for or against what they believe to be in the interests of the people of the country. But a muni- cipality, small or large, Is given the right, ♦he power and privilege, so to speak, of entering into some public work, of granting a bonus to some in- dustry, and of taxing the properties In that municipality to pay such bonus or grant, and a general powei la slven; the general power re- mains on the statute books from year to year, and from decade to decade, and how can my honorable friend apply that to the doctrine by which a law affecting a great moral question Is passed by the representatives of the people in this House, and then sent out to the people to be voted upon, and the moment that vote is completed the law relating to the referendum falls to the ground and dies and ceases to exist ? Now, Sir William Harcourt's bin and Mr. Chamberlain's bill were just such laws as we have now In this land of ours; they provided for local option in regard to the liquor traffic, and consequently they provided that the votes of the people should govern and therefore they are not applicable. The citation of them does not apply in the slightest degree whatever to the considerations which affect honorable Kentlemen In discussing this bill or coming to a conclusion upon it. Chief Justice Cooley, who Is well known as a lawyer and a judge, of high stand- ing In the United States, made some remarks of an academic nature with re- gard to the question of referring matters to the people, and I do not know 9 m whether anybody ever disputed with him about it, but hlii remarka have ao poMlble application to this bill for the reasons which I have riven, and for reasons which perhaps I may dilate upon at greater lenirth later on. Let us see, too, what the honorable gentleman will make out of the speech or remarks uttered by the Hon. Alexander Mackenxle. My honorable friend, af- ter quoting Chief Justice Cooley, and these other citations, which have no l>earing whatever upon the question, also sUted that the Hon. Alexander Mackenzie used this language, and I have no doubt he did use the language, but I want to read it: "I have always taken the ground that until public sentiment has reached such an advanced stase of maturity that we would be quite certain of a very large majority in favor of such a measure, it would be unwise and impolitic to attempt to ("nforce a total prohibition of the li- quor traffic." Who disputes it ? I do noc, Mr. Speaker. Well, my hon- orable friend goes on to comment on this, and then quotes Senator Vidal, also Senator Aikins on this question, but he does not say one word as coming from these gentlemen, because he could not utter such a word in favor of a referendum at all, or in favor of such a referendum as is proposed here. Hon. Alexander Mackenzie, and the other distinguished men alluded to did not, as he endeavored to have honorable gentlemen believe, express one word in favor of the idea of adopting the referendum. SIR W. R. MEREDITH QUOTED. Then, it was amusing to listen to my honorable friend. I have been in this I^ouse fourteen years, and it was the first time I ever heard one word uttered by the honorable gentleman except in condemnation of Sir William Meredith, but it does seem to me that my honorable friend will not get very much from the reference he has made to that distinguished gen- tleman. It is our experience, and has been our experience in this House that honorable members should never be surprised at anything the honorable gentleman does, and not very much at anything he may say, but to think he should be so far driven to a corner as to find himself compelled, and he must have found himself so or he would not have done what he did, to quote Sir William Meredith's remarks made diirlng a political speech at London, and also the remarks of Mr. John J. Maclaren in support of the constitu- tionality of this act ! Mr. John J. Maclaren is a reputable member of the legal profession and all that sort of thing, but I ask, honorable gentlemen, whether it would have occurred to anybody else in the City of Toronto, ov in the Province of Ontario, but the Premier of Ontario, to quote him as an authority on any constitutional question, and outside of a matter of interest to the political parties of the Province of Ontario ? (Opposition cheers.) It is not the first time that tlie honorable gentleman has ifone to Conservative sources for the inspiration which guided him with reference to his public conduct, it la not the first time that doctrine has been borrowed from Con- servative sources in order to bolster up and reinvigorate the tottering and dying party which he is leading still. (Opposition cheers.) In 1884, I think it was, it was before I came here, tHe same distinguished man. Sir William Meredith, introduced a bill iuio {his House providing for the establish- ment of manhood suffrage In the Province of Ontario, and this gentleman who valued his opinion so highly to-day stood up in his place and voted down this proposition of the distinguished gentleman. Sir WlTliam Meredith. They waited three years and then they adopted the principle advocated by Sir William Meredith, and to-day it is the law of the land, like many other questions which have come from the Conservative party in this House, and have not been acknowledged— like the position taken by the Great Reform Party of the Dominion of Canada which has sv/allowed holus bolus the Na- tional Policy and Protective Tariff, and feels very comfortable after the dose lO :.!■ 'C: It has taken. (Opponltion cheers.) I ar.i surprlaed at the covne pursued by the honorable gentleman In appealing to Conservative authority. Now what Sir William Meredith says was read by my honorable friend, and he is wel- come to all the comfort he can ret out of it. Sir Willlnm Meredith evidently had in mind the plebiscite which has been enacted, and which has been voted on, and he spoke his mind with reference to the lar^e majority of the people who ouyht to endorse and support any law of this kind, but did eiT William Meredith say that the Government of the Province of On- tario should run ai^ay from their responsrolllty ? (Hear, hear.) Did he say a law should be Introduced and passed In this House and then turned over to the people to vote upon it asraln ? Hon. Mr. Ross— Tes. Mr. Whitney— He said nothing of the kind. Hon. G. W. Ross— Yes. (Reads) : " If it shall be determined that there Is Jurisdiction In the Local Legislature tn deal with this question of the liquor traillc, then It will be the duty of any Government which is In power in Ontario to bring In a bill and pass It for the purpose of bringing into effect what has l>een determined to be within the Jurisdiction of the Legis- lature. It seems to me that any such law as that should be an effective law, and should have no results that would be disastrous to the Interests of tem- perance throughout the country, and therefore I think it would be decidedly In the interests of the whole community that any measure such as that, before it should become law, should be again submitted to the people in order that they should have an opportunity uf pronouncing yea and nay upon it." Mr. Whitney— Just as I said. (Opposition laughter.) (Mr. RoSs rose to make a remark): If my honorable friend will be con- tented, there Is an old Burmese proverb which says that the ass, though weary, carries its burden. Hon. Mr. Ross— On which side of the House Is that inoffensive member? (Government laughter.) Mr. Whitney— I do not apply it to him in any offensive sense, but I am not going to quarrel with him If he shall ar ly it. If he will Just allow me to go on, because I am going on (Opposition cheers), I can make every possible allowance for he hon. gentleman who has been under the harrow, so to speak, who has been roasted (Opposition cheers) for the last two months of his life by night and by day, who, as soon as he has become releas^ for a moment from the importunities and threats of the liquor men, has found himself face to face with the determined attitude of tlu: men whose principles he haa be- trayed In this province, therefore, I say, sir, I can make every allowance for my honorable friend, and were it not for the fact that I am afraid he would not accept It, I would offer him my pity. (Opposition laughter.) Sir Wm. Meredith did not say what the honorable gentleman contends he soJd. Is there one word In Sir Wm. Meredith's speech of a referendum loaded so as kill the bill? (Opposition cheers.) Is there one word In his address that it shall be submitted to the people? Who that knows the bold and chlvalric course always pursued by that honorable gentleman would doubt for one in- Ftant that he would have spurned from him with contumely any attempt or suggestion that he should handicap the people with r. iPd to a vote which he might or might not consider necessary on that nuestion ? (Opposition ap- plause.) BOURINOT'S TESTIMONY. Now, however, my honorable friend dealt jvith Sir John Bourlnot. There was a peculiarity If honorable gentlemen will notice It, a peculiarity all II ^tm ■''^'- ' t- throuch hta apench the other day that he only read extracts from the authorl- tiM he quoted. Sir John Bourlnot waa here five days consultlnc with the honorable tentleman Hon. O. W. Roaa— No. Mr. Whitney— I aay, yea. Hon. G. W. Roaa— I aay no. I ahall call the honorable gentleman to order t have not apokeii to Sir John Bourlnot. I think, within twelve montha. Mr. "Whitney— T 8a> that Sir John Bourlnot waa here the moat ot Hve daya on the bualnesa which my honorable friend refera to. Mr. Roaa— I muat contradict my honorable friend; he waa not here on that buBlneaa. There paaaed two letters, one to Sir John Bourlnot, and the other to me. I have not aeen him nor apoken to him, nor did 1 know he waa In the city. iMr. Whitney— I do not contradict niy honorable friend, and 1 will go right back now to what I aald. In every caxe of citation by the honorable gentle- man (Hon. O. W. Roaa) he doea not road the whole opinion, and In the case of Sir John Bourtnot he doea not read one word or letter or syllable which aaya that hia referendum la conatltutlonal. (Opposition cheera.) Who, that knowa the place that Sir John Bourlnot occupies In the ranka of conatltu- tionallnta would expect anything else? air John Bourlnot In all the extracta quoted by tho honorable gentleman goes no further than to aay something like thia, that the idea haa progressed, that it Is very ll'..oly one of tho<*e vexed questions which might be taken from out the quarrels of Pnrilanen- tary Ctovernment or Parliamentary contention, but, air. In order to make sure Just let me see what Sir John Bourlnot saya:— " White the plebiscite may bo compared to tho Swlns Inlttntlre which gives tlio right to the electors to iho^p the legislative ImmIIos to take up and consider any fiibjcct of public Interest, the referendum which U also horro^x-ed from the same country, has heen also suggested on several occasions as a dcsliahle and efficient manner of bringing Into force a measnre which can only bo snccfssful when It ob- t.'iins the unequivocal support of a large majority of the people Interested in Its provisions. This democratic feature of the .Swiss political system may be compared with the practice that olready exists iu Canada of referring certain by-laws of municipal ttodies to the vote of the ratcpnyors, of giving to the people In n district ihe opp.>rtunity of accepting or rejecting the Canadian Temperance Act, of permitting a majority of the ratepayers in a municipal division to establish a free library at the public expense, etc." As far aa 1 have head the quotation from Sir .Tohn Bourlnot given by my honorable friend there Is n&t one word with regard to the constitutionality of the referendum, and how could there be? The referendum Is In direct an- tagonism to the principles of our system of Cabinet Government. Hon. O. W. Ross— I win read this quotation from Sir John Bourinot: .\s far ns the Crown can, at any moment, exercise its undoiihttd prerogative of dissolution !u order to obtain an expression of geueral opinion on a popular vote, so it can use the referendum under the authority of the Legislature as a direct means of ascertnlnlng the popular will on a <'»- •»y. ilr. that ^^.fte^ perhapTSTt JSm . '^«'"'«"on. i am bound to toot-note to the effect. .TcJ^ S^^T^^Z ^.^T, '" *" '^''^ »»' * When the Gtevemment m power InTe yLr 1S2 tn^ .""" "''''' dl-«»uUon blUty." (Opposition cheers.) It S quUeTo.l^.« *"« *''°''* "»*''• "*»<>"'- •tltutlon to be ch«n«ed so that ie reLendu™ :. !'*~''*'"' '**«• "»"» hon- our system, but until that is Jone U sTot t^ TT "' ^^"^ '"*'* ^"'«>» »' become any part or portion .? our British TlfH *"" '^'""'- *"* «^"°t Then, my honorable friend's quoUtS LT^vI ^Lm" '°^P°«""»« <=beers.) Of the Ideas that had been expressed .y^hT a^tiitrS ::2.ZTlZ"°- THE Rfll'ERENDUM IN AUSTRALIA thehoro^^retnirrhrb^s^tiTn'r^^^^^ rtr.*"'-''^ -— - Which he Introduced, and I will say thirft u k ^ Australian question he was ,0 Ul-advlsed as to introduce no hu .f.^''**"'' "*' comprehension why trallan precedent, because it ^e^tly a^ta^L.tTs "Jm ''"*''"•»' *" ^- Important particulars. In the nrst placeT^i„7„,?'" ^^'V°° *° *^* """t called Pomeroy, with ,vhose existence i did thlniTn vT '*'*'" *** * «««tleman close aoaualntance. but of whlrh I am Hmfn^ . ^^ honorable friend had a tralla ^ives us. In the case o/te A^t^.^S^^ V**'"' ""* "' "^ ^»'" A"- brought out in our debate on the st^atTi^lutSn^'""^'*''* " ^" '""^ that they intended to have, and do C nX 2^; 7. J ^ "*" ''''"^"^ ^'^ the Legislature, both of which are elected b^ th. „ f '*""• **** »'»"*«• <" that in case there should be a deadlock h!Ja/ I ^ '"^' *"^ *''*'' P'-<»'-''- the establishment of the 'referenrm htl^^rnaM^r h^e'L.^''*"'"^ ^"^"'^ aou«. .o.d t.e up..e. Ho.e eoni.jrs.- rs/pri:?; tr.j:;.;.^^'- the^Lirt:;'e^rnr o':r;r:hVh:r.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ -^ -^- - ^ '^w whi:. there is no other remedy at hand whe, It fw?S "'^'^ ''''''• *""' " '" *'^^^"« then they say we will ano^i t^thTl , """^^^ ^'■'' '" * deadlock, and It is the onTremedy tJThad The^"' '" '"'^'^ '" ^"^^ " ^^'^y- »»--"- It will be noticed hov dlffeivnf th.. v.r _ the referendum is Swltzerlanf xL e th "oC'l, cl.'r""'' '" -^-'-"'^ '• 'ron, .•d both H011.PS. Only In om- cose doos th» . ?^ ^ "" " ''"' ^'"'^'' hag - * a dispute between t^e :::noZZ-:ZX.TaiZ:^l\l^^^ " r"'"'""" •" '''' Ho«.. Xhe p.„....e „rT T^ L" SL^Trt.^'. S^lLe^r:^'^^^'" *" *^- irOBMHR CONSERVATIVE LE^BEJRS MISREPRBSBNTE©. tralla. Now then the honorable gentlemen alleged, and 1 would like to have J3 hlin now suite with what authoHty. that MeMn. TUlcy and Wtmtte wm in favor of— I do uot quote his exact language— but he quoted them as tritatntm In favor of adopting the referendum. He produced no proof, and untU he doea I Bliaply aay he was trifling with this Houm. He also alleged that Slr John Thompson was in favor of the referendum. Fancy the assuraacs with which this honorable gentleman took upon himself to state to the members of this Legislature and to the province at large that all those leading sUtesman were in favor of the doctrine of th« referendum, at the same time producing no word of proof of the statement which he made. Then, he actuaUy quotes Sir John Thompson in these words: '• I am not submitting, as the honorab.e gentleman seems to anticipate, that there is any constituUonal question in- volved. Sir John Thompson did not raise constitutional objections. He said: ' I have no doubt we can change and mould our constitution In that re^>ect as we please.' So he had no doubt as to the cons JtuUonal process." No, he had no doubt as to the constitutional prcjese. but he did not say a word as to the presence of any constitutionality in the adoption of the referendum with- out a constitutional process having to be gone through, and more than that Sir John Thompson said: I feel rery confident in the auertton that sacb u mode of action la utterly repug- nant to the constltntlonal principles we hare adopted and followed wirh xeal down to the preeent time. (Oppoaitlon cheers.) Then he also claimed the old hero. Sir John Macdonald. Of course Sir John Macdonald cannot come here to reply. iMy honorable friend said: Further evidence ahows that Sir Joho Macdonald nnd Sir Mackenrie Bowell, aad nil who had any status in Parliament In fact, for the last ten or ilfteen years, either by their rote or by their speeches accepted the conHtitntlonallty of a referendani. The old hero has gone; If the honorable gentleman will produce any- thing to prove his 8ta;:ement he will make his position unassailable with re- gard to Sir John Macdonald, but I want to read a few words now. Hon. O. W. Ross— My remariu were based on this. In 1889 when the sub- ject of prohibition was up In the House of Commons there was llrst a motion by Mr. Jamleson, the then leader of the temperance forces, and there was an amendment by Mr. Wood, of Broclcvllle, and there was an amendment to the amendment by Mr. Taylor, of liCeds, as follows: That all the words after " purpose " In the original tt,»>lutlon be struck ont, and the following substituted: If It be found on a vote of the qualified electors of the Dominion first being taken that a majority thereof are in favor of a prohlblttou law, it shall also make full provision for compensating those engaged In the manu- facture of such liquors! Sir John Macdonald and Sir Mackenzie Bowell and fifty-six others voted for this resolution. (Government cheers.) Mr. Whitney— lAnd . n that vnr based the statement with regard to Sir John Macdonald! I do not woiider it was not given to us. I do not wonder that the honorable gentleman did not show to us the foundation upon which he stood in this deliberative assembly for saying that these two men had been in favor o' this referendum to which the honorable gentleman wishes to call as supporters all the leading men of the Dominion of Canada. SIR MAjCKEJNZIE BOWBIjL.'S DBNIAU I have snme inroof here myself and we will see what one of the gentlemen whom he wrongfully accuses has to say with regard to this. (Reads letter from Sir Mackenzie Bowell as follows): Ottawa, Feb. 20tli, 1902. Dear Mr. Whitney,— Tour favor of the 18th only leached me this morning, In which you call my attention to a stateni ent wblob yon say was made by Hon. Mr. M me tut "tk* ptlnriplt of th« Nfflnndnm bad bMO adoptad by Sir John Une- donald and Sir .Maekonala Bowall for tbe laat tan or flttaen yaara." I am at a loaa to nndaratand what grounds h» had to Juatlljr snch a atatemrnt. I bar* no neol- IccUon or knoirladgo of Sir John Macdonald tvar .dTocatinv tho princlplo of a rafar^nduin In Canada. Hon. O. W. Iloa»— I said voting. Mr. Whitney— My honorablo frtand can put It any way he UkM. (Mr. Whitney continues reading): I'or niywlf I bare In Paillament, and through the colama of the preia. opposed the principle, not only of a referend im but also of a plebiscite as being schemes by which bllnliters could avoid that renponnlblllty, which nnder ou- system of Oot- enunent It U their duty to assume. In thin respect a refevesdnm Is mnch worse (ban a plebl^lte. for the reason that In tbe Utter case the Goveinment would ae- some the responsibility of acting after tbe will of ♦be people had been ascerUlned. in the former, that of a referendum, the responsibility Is shifted from the shonldecs of a Ooveminent to that of the people. I know of no greater Tlolatlon of the prin- ciples of responsible ; ernment than the course which Is being taken by the Boss Oovernment on the question of pwAlbltlju. (Oppoaltlon cheers.) Let UB see what further we have In this wondw^l argument of my hon- orable friend the other day. After these atatementa a* to Sir John Mac- donald and Sir Mackensie Bowell. about which we wlU not hear much more In future, my honorable friend goes on to say: " If, therefore, we are making a ^^uZ ^^ "* '"***°* " '•'*'' "«'' *^^ sanctfan. the sancUon o( the ^l^ ?^ "' Commons." Think of It! He makes the statem. it here boldly. We are making this departure on high legal sancUon. th« sanction Of the British House onunons," and In his speech there la not a sylUhle to show that the Erit._a House of Commons expressed Itself on this ques- tion, not one word or syllable. Then, he clal.-ns the sanction of the Austra- lian Commonwealth, the sancUon of the Canadian House of Commons, the sancUon of the great leaders In consUtuUonal law on both sides of the AUan- tlc; there we no more worlds. Mr. Speaker, for him to conquer. (OppoalUon cneers.) If there had been available one million planets, each having hun- dreds of thousands of leaders of Uiought on consUtuUonal pracUces my hon- Z?i! 71*"f p*?,"l? "*''* ^'^ ^'''^ "" ^"' "^« *«^ (Opposition cheera) He quotes Lord Salisbury, too, but he is very careful to make his quotaUon separate from the context. He does not give us any explanation of what I/>rd t?e BH^-hT '"''''"f. "^""^ ^* "^^^ **~"* * '**«^' ^^^^ ^" l"««i by the British Conservative party In which ttie referendum was made a party planfc Very well. aU I have to say about that U UUs: when Uie question of tiie adoption of the referendum as part of our consUtution comes up for dis- tZ^^Z ''"'.*'' ^ **•'* *•* *''''* "'"^^ "^" "• ««^ " *»»« honorable gen- tleman will send to me that upon which he bases his criUclsm of Lri Salisbury and the Conse.vative party of Qreat Britain perhaps I may be able to let in some light on that quesUon. There was not one quotaUon given by my honomble friend declaring that In Uie opinion of any man of note or reput* we should adopt the referendum in a case of this kind. The only quotaUons which were at aJl In point were as to the propriety of the idea of a refer- endum. not that It was an idea which could be admitted Into our present constitutional system-and set It all out of gear-and provide whenev« thm., JJ^h! T •* *,7***' "'■ * '*''*°*^ Government that that Government could decide they would not assume the responsibility of certain quesUons. but they woul^ nut the responsibility over or. the shoulders of the people and they wou^d^tay In their places. (Opposition cheers.) Honorable ^ntiemen will net forget In connection with Uie submission of cjuestlons to Uie peoole in Uie united States .«d In Swltserland-there 1, no case of Its havlng^n done In England-It Is one thing to submit an abstract question to the pe^e '5 k ffil^^ H,,,^- wvf ft u ? I i-afe.. mich u " null w« have ^roblbitloar' upon Um rote to raspaot of whleb • law ihiUl b« founded by the Legislature, and quite anotiier question to paaa a law such aa ttolai and eubmlt It to the pwple. It la only quMttoaa of the formor nature whlcb have been referred to the people In tho Unltad ttatea aa I ahall endeavor to show you before long. THE C ONBTITUTIONAIi QUESTION. With regard to tbe oonaUtutlonallty of the referendum we have a genUe- man In this city, I>r. CMdwln Smith, who Is generally understood to have some considerable repuUtlon with regard to constitutional questions, and among other things he says this:— It leemi to b« amumed that tbe Ontario Qoveniinent In dealinf with prohibition Intends to relieve Itself of Its legUlatlTe reaponiilBlllty by sobmlttlng the Issue to tbe people. In this ca«e the popular vote would have leglslatlre force, as the ratUca- tfon of an Act of Parilament; wberea* the plebiscite Uken by the Dominion Oorsm- ment bad no leglvlatWe force, bnt wa« merely an Informal test of opinion. This In abort would be a real application of the rcferendnm. Tbe day may come when th« referendum may be a part of Canadian Inntltutlona. Bnt tbe day baa not cobm yet. Hon. Mr. Olbson— lit has come right now. Mr. Whitney— My honorable friend agreed with me right up to that sentence; why does not he conUnue his attitude ? (Continues reading): But the day baa uot yet come. In ibp n.eantlme It will not do to license any OoTemment at Its pleasure to ablik an embarraaslng question by throwing off tbe responsibility of decision upon the people. (Opposition cheers.) I have two o- three other quotations from this disl tingulshed publicist on the same matter and to th • same effect, bi I wUl only read the latter portion of one: The Ht'paratlon of tbe qncatlon of compeniatlon from that of prohibition prac- tically Inviting the people to vote for prohibition without compensation and rele- gating componsatlon to the rafmla-rs of the Le»l8lat«re. who would probably be afraid to do Justice, Is not honest; noi has Mr. Boss asset ted that It Is. These are the views of this distinguished gentleman. Then, U\\ Speaker here comes In very well a reference to my honorable friend's suggestion that we are not always to be In leading strings, and my honorable friend once started went on to dwell for five or ten minutes on the burning question of our being able to discuss and consider and decide upon our own politi- cal future, that we are not always to be kept In leading strings, and the Indignation which my honorable friend manifested was something noticeable from all sides of the House-that we are not any longer to be kept In leading strings by Great Britain, and we do not care whether we have pre- cedent or not, we will make the precedent; but the question which my hon- orable friend refrained from touching upon was that part of the question al- luded to by Dr. Goldwin Smith. My honorable friend failed to suggest tha any Government would have the right to decide what questions they would bear the responsibility of and what questions they were afraid or unwUUng to bear the responsibility of and push them aside to be decided by the peo- ple. (OpposlUon cheers.) I have here a letter written by a member of the English bar with reference to the Manitoba bill, which Is now under discus- sion. Id it Is so much In point that I hope honorable gentlemen will bear with while I read It, and I am ound to say this, that this letter and the dot;trlne therein contained applies distinctly to the bill and referendum un- der discussion in this House, but the application and the meaning of It are rendered much more intelligible and clear when you consider It with refer- ence to this Manitoba law, because there is this difference between our pro- posed law and the Manitoba law, the latter was passed without any refer- ence to a referendum, and a referendum now is sought to be tacked on to it. This gentleman writes to the newspaper : i6 ♦ a " win jtn allow me tpaot to nUt to tht qaeatlnn »• to wkrtker tb« propoMMI nfHradam bill la eonstttntional ? The poaltlon In Manitoba la abortlr tbla. Tba U- Wor Act waa paaaad by the Leglalat ire and rpoflved the Boyal aaaciit on the Mb Jaly, M«>. Tba amendlnv Act ander which It waa to come Into force npon tbv proclamation of the Lleatenant-Oov.Tnor-ln Cuumrll recelred the Royal aaaent on the asth Mandi. 1801. It la now proponed t<» take a , ote of the Npeople aa to whether the Llqnor Act ahoald be v.n(orced or not. The qaeatlon baa not, aa far aa I can learn, been dealt with In any tinglUh conrt, and ao we turn to American authorltlee to aacertain whether a atmllar cane baa nrlaen there, and npon ao doing I And the law to be laid down In the American and EngUab Encyclopoedla of Law, aecond edition. Vol. 6. page 1022, aa followa. (I might aay tbla work la perbapa moie commonly refi-rred to ne authority by both Jndgea and coanael than any other) : •' Even the people of the State cannot under the conatltatlon by meana of •nbmlaalon to popular vote, be reinvested vlth tlie function of legislation conferred by them on a department of the aoverument, und the Legislature cannot render the enactment of a taw dependent on Its acceptance by the rotera of the State, nor can the expediency of repealing an eilsting law be thus submitted to a popu- lar rote. " For the Legtslatora to say that they deem a law expedient, provided the peo- ple shall deem It <;spedlent amonnta to an abandonment of the LegUlatlre func- tions. A feUtnte passed to take effect upon a subsequent event must be when It cuuies from the hands of the Uw In praosenti to take effect In future. On the question of the expediency of the law, the Legislature must exercise Its owr «udg- mcnt deflnltely and Anally. If the law e.nn be made to take effect on thi mr- rence of an event, the Legislature jaust declare It expedient If the event shall happen, but Inexpedient If It shall not happen. They can appeal to no other man or men to Judge for them In relation to Its present or future propriety or neces- Hlvy. They must exeiclse that power tbemselves, and thua perform the duty Im- posed npon them by the constitution, lint In case of a la«v drawn to take effect. If It shall Ite approved by irapular vote, no event affecting the expediency of the law Is expected to happen. The < xpedlency or wisdom of the law abstractly consid- ered does not depend npor a vote of the people. If It Is unwise before the vote Ih taken It la equally unwise afterwards. The Leflslatiire had no more right to refer such a question to the whole people than to n single Individual. (Ex uarte Wall, IT Am., R. 42P.) 'Tbla liability arises no loss from the Joint ptlnclple applicable to every dele- j.uted power requiring kuowledKe, dlHcretlon and rictltude In Its exercise than from the positive provisions of the constitution Itself. The people In whom the power resided have voluntarily relinquished. Its exercise, and have positively or- dained that It shall be vested In the Aseembly. To allow the general Assembly to cast It back on them would be to subvert tlie constitution, and chaugc Its dis- tribution of power without their action or consent. (Cincinnati, etc., R Oo v Clinton Co., 1 Ohio, S., 77.» "(lllnstiatlon) Where a statute regularly passed by the General Assembly and approved by the Governor contained provisions for submitting It to a vote of the people, as to whether It should becrts«I at the flnt part w.r-h.. bc,„ ,„b«,.,^ Vo tS pS^r .^d .'„ ^•'"•"♦-"*"'"' •-"dB.ot. I. that -ni; oi;;:jTrra„Th,rsLth.;r'' r? -'"''- ' »-- *»>- vot« were required TLoud Zl^fn T * '"""• "•Jortty of tht whole think for a r^^St th^t J.^r^^allo 7? '^" *"• •"*»«'*»"• «*««.«« b. allowed to .tanrup in th,VL«e^o™^^^^^ that he to to -hown by their reprewntat ve. ?•« tj!! I. ?* "*^*"'' °' *"• '^'"« " people Of the Province of Ontarto «! L, fJ* "Tw"""'' ** ^^^ '^* which have been taken in the Unit J^ at.? il*" ''"'' '^"* *«> »•»* vote, lutely untrue ? (OppiittoncJee^T^fK ■'-"!* '"*'*"* " '"""'' "« •»»«>- and definite dllterenTLtween^oi.t tu tlo^n.^. 'T' *''''* *■ » *"""«* Ject. that are .ubn.lttedTo the voti ", T "'"*•«»"'•"*» «"« other .ub- Of the United State., and In order to .hort!.„'*"''"* '" *"• ""*"•"* «*•»- wy right here It require, a mIloHtv.„^° .""" ■^''' -omewhat I will rre.ent. and voting. whe„? cJt a L . ' '* °-*''"* ^'**-' «' *"• v-**" a majority of the vote. pL^Tt '^Lh' '«'•*'" P'"T.ow ? No. It requires tion. to call a con.tltuL^nafTonv" „In Lt h *"* !!"*"" °' ^^''^^ *'- •ne. The call for a con.tltutlonal onnJ^nH , *'*"'°™We gentlemen follow any rate must haveTn Vavir of TtK " *." **"* ^'*** «>' Mlnne.ota at at the general or ata " e'ectlon It wSl'hT'"""'' "' *"** ^°*^'-- ''"' voted Of whether a convention tSlZ llZTorZv'Tt ""T "" ^''" """""" flnlte In number, than the auction- . ,.^ "* °'''*'" lue.tlon.. Inde- Bubmltted to the vote of Jhe pe one fr,l h """l'*"""""*' amendment, are Of the United State,, and so far thl, *o *""* '" «•«*«"» State, have been able to discover wiereJh.iwl" nTM"" '""^ ""««>" which I vem. (Oppo.lf.on cheer^ Hor^ah^Ln.V"' "' ^''^ ^*'*^" '=*'" «hall and on lookm^ up this book crilefpoSr'\r" ''""' ''^ '^^^^^^ I ^m distinctly correct. I dr„ot wll to „Z "" "Referendum." that an I have to say 1. thl.. In pa.s,nr?rom H, *" *"""*"»"* ""W^ct. but understand how any man. the ?S,e; Tf til. nrnt.""""*"*' *"** ' *'*'""" could look at that book and makr^uch a n!.-l T '""*' ***■ '""' *»**>«•• ">«"'• man ha. apparently maderthreffectoJthrl""'*''* honorable gentle- celve public opinion In the I^ovlnce o' Onfar.o r*"'"* °' ^•"«''' »»*" «»*- have no doubt he fondlv t^r.2 "^"tarlo. and bring to hi. aid. a. I njB. NOW. .., .::Z'l alThese'caL^r flr*^* T^"' -'""- ""«- third majority wa. required It '^ not «o t i " •"* """•* *"«>• » t^o- - . .... „„„.«„ .,. ..»,.-,;^ -::r iai':.r.r, lo tto wntrary. Thw* to aaaO wr VMoltority with rtftrtne* to th* rabmlwlon o( thte quMtiOB tb«t M tar Ml hAV* nottc«4— I do not now irlvo tbto poa- Itlv^X— M tar M i havo notlotd In my' hurried conalitcrfttloa of thto bum- miro and thta Itoolr in th« nwjorltjr nf cum. I bolUv* In all oaaaa. th<» ▼otaa takan by tha paopla on dlffarant nubjecta, conatltutloaal amtndmanta. and otharwlaa, hava baan taken on tha day thara waa another aleotloa gotac on. That to tha caaa In lCaaa8<:huaatta. New York, and Arkanaaa. THE VARIOUS VOTES IN THE UNITED STATES. In tha State o( Maaaaohuaetta ther* was a conatltatlonal amendment pro- poaed to the people on which llS.ooo In round numbera voted for It, and uralnat It Ml.OOi^ the total votea beinir 27<,0OO. For the Prealdentlal elec- tion ot the anme year there were M'.OOO people voted, ao that the num- ber of thoae who voted on the referendum waa 124,000 leaa than the vote at the general election. So that there they do not aak the people who are in favor of the amendment propoaerl to Ret a majority of the votea caat at the laat general election, or at any other election, and In thla caa > they sot 1M,000 leaa than the numl>er of votea caat at the general election. New. York State fumlahea aliqllar proofa of the point I am now making, via., that the vote In all theae caaea la much leaa on queatlona aubmltted to the vote of the people than the votea cai>t In the State electlona which are held at the aame time. In the cane of New York State. 320,000 voted foi an amendment, and 710,000 agalnat It, making In all 1,030,000. The vote for the Prealdentlal electora waa 1,423.000 or 391,000 more than the votea caat on the conatltutlonal amendment. Take the caae of the State of ArkanHaa. A liquor Ilcenae law waa voted on and waa carried, though the majority was leaa by 5,878 than a two- thlrda vote. The vote atood: for, 86,088; agalnai. 61.862; or a majority of 24,226. In the State of Texaa two amendmenta were voted on, one being carried and one defeated. The one which waa carried had a large major- ity, but there waa no provlalon requiring anything more than a bare ma- jority. In the State of Miaaourl four amendmenta were voted on and all defeated. The higheat vote on any of them fell 20 per cent. l>elow the vote for the Prealdentlal electora. In the State of Minnesota, while voting upon lawa and amendmenta a majority were voted on and carried because they re- ceived a almple bare majority. Now, if the honorable gentleman had con- eulted thla book, he had before hia eyes every word I have said here, and could not poaaibly have been mistaken In every ln.<«tance I have brought be- fore the House. In the State of North Dakota a prohibitory liquor law wa.s voted on and carried, the vote being: for, 18,562, and against, 17,393; or a majority In favor of It of 1,159. This was carried and had the force of law at once without a further majority. The vote at the political election was 38,083, ao that with what I may call the Ross handicap the prohi- bition law would have been defeated by a large majority. In 1894 an amend- ment prohibiting lotteries was carried on the following vote: for, 10.579 and against, 6,309, or a majority of 6,270. Here, though the opponents of lot- teries were victorious by nearly two to one, they would have been beaten by 8,920, alnce the vote for Congreasmen that year totaled 38,997, had thf Itoaa handicap prevailed. Then, let me refer to the book Itaelf in one or two cases. Take the case of Nebraska (on page 176): "More th.tn one-haif— to be exact, an average ot 51.16 per cent.— of thoae voting for Presidential electora did not vote on the amendment. Thip varied from 45 to S3 per cent." Then in Colorado (page 176): " The vote stood 25.327 In ' •- and 39,790 against, or a total of 65.117. It was thus defeated by o , -r cent, against, to less than 40 per »9 ?*J •^ to l*vo4-. But tiM vote tor PrwNtfmittol ttoctora wm msn. m tkat nboMt OM out of thrtt who voted toi tho otecton Totod oatb*^ aisMd. 1^" JillU"' *'!'! "" ■*•*• "' *««"'»^- "Onlr abotit ono-thM of tbo ^^ r. K!:r , •"••»«>•"•"» " «•". »•»» »»•• "UW of liikbo (PMO m): «I^ IJ^"'" '""" *"• ••*"*• "«"'~ "^» '»- •au«i-«.irr.,ri»«ii: ^ f^"**^ '"• •""" ^'•'••' «»"» »•«•» ••" »»»*« ".»00 ttoeton voud on It. whU. Fr»ld«nti.l W*ctor« m,lv«l In round numboriMOM" h.t IB .v.ry c.*e thcr* w«. not only nuthln. hut . moro mitorlS^^ tho vol. w.. polM. A much I— voie. In oth.r word., b.lB, iSllS for tull L .,r . /"k. •"""" '''•^"°"- "•"=»* ""^ »«o"or..bl. frt.nd. knowui hi biu t. !? ^' ;?„ r ""r- """" •"• '*••• ""'» •»•'"'•"» '•^" ^^"^ ini. Mil I. to b« foufht And won oi Io.t. (OppoMltion chMr. > Th.n •• h.v. th. B..te or W«hln,ton (on pa«e i:9). anV thr^mrSt.^f ^Jtl f.rrijd to them at the .ame time by way of referendum. Then the State of Michigan (pace m), there wa> thi. queetloo. and It I. •ZLT :"" "= " "• "** >''" '"^ "'^"' *" •"Emitted on th. tMUtoL Amendment to oon.titutlon relative to the ll.jnor trafBc/ It wa« wM^ rtheML*. "" rr"""' "" '- «>-hlbU.on. and u wa. th. "lof^uJ l^t \ . •"■ ^'"^'' ^"^■"°'« *•« voted upon, yet a vote wa.Tl«^ of if^SilSTlons??' rr^lT " "'""'''' "*• ^°^" Pre..dentJvo;: lai thT^-SL irli; f- . ^ "■ """^ Australia again. I have already ehown that th. great fact about the Australian referendum 1. that It I. no^ an that of the upper Hou.e .hould the upper Houee continue to reJwTa bUl pa«ed by the lower Houae." " It will be noticed how ve4 dWerenT the r" ferendum a* proposed In Australia is f,.,„, the referendum In 8wlt«rtanr There th. voting Is chiefly on a bill which ha. pa..ed Tt? ho J. cSly «„ one ca^ doe. the law provide for a referendum m case of rdi.pSe bl P»r»r^" '7'* '"'" "^- "^^ ••^'"•endum Is to be Introduced Into the Au.trallan Parliamentary system to settle question, of dispute between the two H^s" The people are not to be supreme legislators, but arbiter./^ Here Is what Hon. Geo. Reld. the dIstlnKuIshed Premier of New South Mm wUirhoTv "'UL'*"'"'' ^° *'•• ^"^''"°"- ^^^ o- --ten- u«^ bj hta win .how you h-Sw utterly a.id completely the honorable gentleman U n,u.tronrofrr: wh;.^mTrrfr?erdrid%rir™r- j: have no appeal from thU Houk, we have only one leglslaUve Sjlv JL hav^ ruirbe^^^o^r^^rnrr rrsairu^f t^i^^^^^^ referendum he would only have one nlu/e fel Aif" wUh one HoLi' but If they had more than one House he felt aafe with ^e Trfierum TtW^ I wouW be utterly unjustified If I attempted to use any .S^Umrof SoLoI^le gentlemen .„ order to show them either of two thln^i; Tat eve.^ "^t:^; 20 »•«• by tb* honoraU* ftntlMMui with rvrird to this bmUct la ntetlen to Vb» mu4* or 4totiiisvtoli«4 mn of Canate. OrMt Ortiain and Auatralla baa bor laoorract: aa4 nrat with rtCartneo to th« rondltlon of affaira m'Vtnt ooo of tbo ItatM of th« Amaiican Union, d«clarln« d«llb*rat«lr that In ovtry caao ho haa oxamlnod into, a two-thlrda majority was rm^utrad, when In fact •uch a majority li raqulrad In no caa», waa also at lf««t utterly Incomct. If tho honorablo conUoman had juat read th* doctrine laid down by Hon. 0«>. Bold ha would have M«n that Mr. Rrid felt perfectly Mfe In hta provlnco with one Houoo, and would not have felt tafe with two Houaee, and therefore, and only thoreforo, doalred to have a referendum. How dooM the honorable gen- tleman know how thU Houae la divided on thia auewtton? How can he know tbla Kouae needa ateadyinc? How doea he know until he «aaumea the re- aponalblllty and calla hia cohorta to atand together with him? How doea he know ihia Houae la oppoaej to or In favor of the provlalona of thia bill? The poottWn .a perfectly conceivable to • lyone who haa an elementary knowledge not only of the Britlah conatltutlon. but aa to the manner In which our aya- tem worka Itaelf out, and It can only work Itaelf out In one way. We have an appeal to a body outalde thia Leglalature. we have an appeal to the people, under our constitutional ayatem, and our conatltutlunal ayntem and method of appeal la aatlafactory to the people of thia province, ani th«^ people know very well that no very Important meaaur- of legtalature. no very iierlouK action by tha Ck>vernment of the day can take place unleaa It If. an thp naylng la, "Broad-baaed upon the people's will." (Applause.) Betaufp under our sys- tem when the (Jovemment. not afraid or nahamed either of the responslblll- tiea which are thelra, take a posltlun for or against any Rr^at public question. tho people know full well that the reoult la left with thorn, and In the oon- atltutlonal way they pronounce for or against It, and tho ciueetlon la thus aettled by the people and for the people, without reference lo the rise or fall or the continuation In office of t;.e Ministry. (Opposition cheers.) In other worda we have Cabinet Oovernment with all that that word Irnplles The hon- orable gentleman said a little while airo aomething about the temperance men 'i'*^*'* *''"*'^ *" ■**"^ "P '•* >>* c'unted. My honorable friend has de- clared that in the past all the gr^at morul victories which have come down hi*"h **** *'*** public advantages »hich we enjoy, the rights and privileges which are oure under responsible govi-rnmer and favoi ed by Ood's bleasing, were won by men who were not afraid to stanu up and flRht. and. Mr. Speaker, I thought how unaelflah he waa. becauae he waa then doscrlbinR every man In thia country other than the leader of th's Qovernrrent. (Loud Opposition cheera.) He went on to say that in the past, as these vie tories had been won by brave men who were not afraid to stand up to he counted, so in the paat had temperance men failed, often •)ecau8e they would t stand up and be counted. Now. Mr. Speaker, he says, you may stand uj, and be counted. If you like, but you shall not carry it even then. THE COURAGE OP BRITiaH STATKSMRN.' He did not tell ua that when the nritlsh people with one blow struck the Irtma off the black men In Jamaica and de.lared that henceforth no slave ahould exist under the Britlah flag, and paid twenty millions pounds sterling for doing ao, they asked a law to be passed and referred It to the people. (Opposition cheera.) There were political giants, Mr. Speaker. In thoae days, there were many who have been quoted and alluded to from the treaaury benches as being " big " men, there were political giants indeed in thoae days, political men In the British Government who were big men, and who were not afnUd of saying, " We will take upon ourselves the responalbillty of thia meaaure, of thia expenditure of twenty millions of pounda aterUng. and 21 i^P «-o^ or *al, b.'c:Se^*eaT*(Op"^;„;' f * ^^^^ =°«-«^ «Sl^ •d Md the one to which I am .houJ to I!^^. *"" ' ^"^ ""^^ ■»>««■ Which perhap. m Importance havT^l v * «"""»«*• two queMlone Bm,«J, Bmpu.. hav,nT^^^th^J,^° V^"^ '" ^-« hiatoH^Se' «™»teet poMlble good to all th« hum— . P**"*"* morality and the dl«»tabll.hment Sl^hl IhU Jhu^HTt'ci",;'** "'. *'"'• ^'•- 0"^tonel Of dolnsr that: he did not run awS^d^t, ,^° ••*"■*" "»• re.l>on.ibliity a aue-tlon of ip^at naUonTi^t^Je L% L^T^!''^ *'*•'*"•> ^« ^" "d to-day hla fame i. that w£S ,t woSf w^* '^^ reeponalblUty of it. at this stare and had refused (Or^r^,?, ** '^*" » PollUcal ooward THE BRITISH SYSTEM DISOARDBD. a large majortty, or by a majority Mth- ' *** *"""'™ *"•«'• action by -hat do the Government ^ ^JV^LT ^""^ "^^ ^°^' '" *•"» c-^ seeking to ascertain at large expSL t^f ^ T^ "*"' '*^'"-«' "«> *« sp«vk elve. to advocate this measurf Si a po "^11 w "1^""'*'''''' ^"'^''^'^ '» »"«'»- the natural and usual way wi«^i„^ I "'*' *^'"* '^'•>'^ the people In the question would be dJcXn Jl "^ '"'*"**'^ *" *he present ttae I'^ constitutional practi-e Bef^tf 1? *••" "'"'""^'^ ^«y. "^ according to Zr J> addition to tWreeVofthe'Ire^ \lTr''': '"-"- -o^ mSa^ce bin, Where a measure which wMc^VfJi * T'^'""'"* *** *»>« !«* Church and I believe arc. more or lew f«mii,.r ^in,, *• *" "' "" »houW be wa. . me^re .„eh „ com™ ^S""' BmlT ".'i' *° """"^ "-^"H a large number of members S^Vhe Reform n„ ?^ *" **** ^''y- 'nclu« »«"tical -h .men.. .. . „_ _ £---;^Ji- -^-^^^^^^^ ' '^'Si^'ri^r W-^-^^"^. ' -i'M^'^^'^M^^!f^'^W^% fomuUly aad ■pedflcaUy by th« people who were most interested In sueb a measure. Wbat waa the reault? AU the argiunenta that were advanced In favor of that course were put aalde and the grreateet peaceable BritMi revolu- tion which ever took place ouUlde of the Brltleh Isles was carried out, and Is now an accomplished fact, and much to our satlsfactlcm. without a dlr«ct vote by the people at all. This is another Instance which I have chosen to «lve to honorable srenUemen for their consideration, as showing the utter imptdlcy and want of Judgment shown by those who endeavor in this case before us to urge that an ordinary bill comprising a matter which is merely within our Jurisdiction, aa f ar as may be at any rate, should not be pro- nounced upon in a constituUonal way by the Oovemment of the day, but should be remitted to the people. Now, I wish also to refer a litUe more at length to some of the utterances of Prof. Ooldwin Smith on this question: The name " referendum " is being ulschlerously misapplied. It belongs properly to a regular mode of legislation, embodied in certain constitutions, sucii as those of Switserland and AustralU which define the occaaions for resort to it, regulate the method and provide the necessniy sategtiards. In tiie Canadian constitution or In that of this province there is nothing of the kind. A proof of it is that three or four different modes of reckoning the vote or determining the sufficiency of the majority are already before us. Amidst this uncertainty the door is evidently open for macbinntlon as well as for doubt. Let us first have the referendum legally in- troduced, regulated in its operation and surrounilerl w 1th Its proper safeguards. We way then have recourse to it with confidence. It Is now taken np for the nonce without constitutional warrant for the purpose of relieving the Legislature of a lesponsibility which properly ibelongs to It; and at the same time dodging the ques- tion of compensation. Unfortunately there le at Oltuwn no control over breaches of the constitution by Provincial Legislatures. This has l»eeu seen in more cases than one. The Prime Minister Is a confederate of the party lu power here, and the Gov- «rnor-General is a cipher. Another quotation: Whether prohibition could succeed on any terras Is an ultimate question which has nothing to do with the Immediate tnith that prohibition cannot have even a chance for Its life In Ontaiio until the prohibitionists .ire strong enough to elect a I^eglslature and create a Government to do their work. A referendum on the terms fixed by Hon .tJ .W. Ross Is a fraud. Aiiy sort iif referendum on the prohibition question must rank as a delusion. The referendum Invites the prohibitionists to exhaust their strength In nonpartisan voting and to leave their enemies on guard hi the Legislature and the Government. 'I'he refereuduni may have its uses, but in the prohibition question the referendum Js simply a dodge to let politicians out of trouble. Prohibitionist sentiment must be either strong enough to fill the Legisla- ture and the Government with poUtlclaus who will do Us woik, or else be wist enough to realize that prohibition Is Impossible and ask for something else. Hon. Mr. Gibson— Who is the author of that? VIEW OF REV. DR. M'LEOD. Mr. Whitney— Bystander. I also wish to read something from Rev. Dr. MoLeod who was a member of the Prohibition CommisBlon issued by the Dominion Parliament: Not only are the Governments of Manitoba aurt Ontario on trial just now— as to their honesty in dealing with a Kreat question— but the prohibitionists of those pro- vinces are on trial, too. If they allow themselveii to be humbugged into acceptance of .the rum men's referendum scheme, handicapped by a compensation clause, and a demand that they poll a roaJorlQ- of the registered votes, they will show themselvei) unworthy of the cause they have professed Interest In, and will give the rum men and the potiticluns additional evidence that they are not to be taken seriously. The one thlnj; for temperance voters to do If they would be respected. Is to visit their righteous indignation on the members who have played them false. Just so long as they allow themselves to be fooled luto approval of such dishonest schemes as those '3 ^4-^?i^:^^' by which the GtoTcrnmenta of UfanUob* and Onturlo are now piMjtng to tk« ma traflc, thty may expect to be laagbed at— aa tbey onght to be— and to have no In- floaace whaterer with Oovernmenta or Lexlalatnm. If they will ataad ap Uka men and stand together, they can win victories. I aJao want to read, becauae thla is the proper place to do ao^ a lettar which appeared In an evening paper in this city several days ago, written tor E. Poroeroy. the compiler of this book, by whoee efforts we have been enabled to dlscuas this queetlon IntelllsenUy, and from whose sutements, aa shown In this book, I have been able to ahomr conclusively this afternoon that the poal- tiona aamuned by the honorable »enUeman, each one of them seriatim and In the whole collectively, have not been founded on the facts as expresMd by Mr. Pomeroy. Mr. Pomeroy. who la an enthusiast on the subject of the roter- endum, writes as follows: . ^'•'".National Direct LeKlglnttoD Lcaifuo can only regard any development or application of the referendum with pleasure, and Us advocacy liy a great party like tne liiDeral party of Canada, and Its apiiliratlon to even one great question la a preat step in advance. We would be Riad to two It applied to all queatlona. bnt weironic Its application to any. It is with decided approval that we greet the Prem- ier Boss Mil. But there is one Important point In that bill which la deddedty wrong. The provision, to be enacted— it must have not a majority of those voting on ir, out a inajority of those oasting their votes at some other election— is almost un- precedented In referendums. As long as every voter has the right and opportunity to vote. If he voluntarily absents himself from the polls that action should not iitrect the vesult. The decision should be by a majority of those actually voting. AH tne iiiii Is constituted it counts 'nme who do not vote against the measure. I lie effect of this will be that those who are opposed to It will stay at home, and tuen both the measure and the referendum will be dl«irredlted because of the small ,,V 'f,'0°«» "" " this was Intended liccause the poll on the measnre Is not to be liel.1 at the regular time with the other votings, but at a special election when notniug else comes before the people, and when the people are not accustomed to ^?u''- J^{ coanje the stay-at-homes will be larger than ,at the regular time. An- other effect of this will be that those in favor of the measure will stay away from tne polls at the previous election. In orderthat the number polled then may be small, ihHI *M*?i°* the majority which will have to te polled on the measure. I should think all the prohibitionists would do this. The honorable grentleman has taken good care In his bill that that last resort of the pirohlbltlonlsts, vis., staylngr away from the polls at the B«neral election, will not have the deelred effect THE QUESTION OF COMPENSATION. Now, Mr. Speaker, with reg:ard to tho question of compensation, the honorable gentleman has chosen to give that question the go-by. He has not chosen to submit the question of compensation to the people, at the same time with the other question, out of which compensation is an offshoot, and holds It, so to speak, over the heads of the people In the future, with the suggrestlon that his attitude on the question of compensation may have its uses in the future. What reason could there be, either In law or In morals, I was going to say, but what reason can there be having re- gard to the dictates of common sense. If the people are to pronounce up- on the question of this bill that they should not pronounce on the compli- cated question which arises out of It? 1 apprehend no good reasons could be given, and no reason has been shown yet. THE DETVriCE TO PREVENT ABSTENTIONS. With regard to the number of votes required In order to carry this bill, a more or less hurried consideration by myself of the figures at the last gen- eral election, which as I understand now is to be the test of the vote for this bill. Is as follows: At the last general election, roughly speaking, there were 432,000 votes polled: In order to carry this bill It will be ne- cessary that 216,000 votes be polled in Its favor. At the last Dominion pleb- iscite the figures show the votes polled In favor of prohibition were 154,000 in round numbers, so that in order to carry this bill at the referendum 24 m i' vot* prahlbltioniats muat vet ■omethinr over 60.000 more votea than they were enabled to poll at the pleblaclte a couple of yeare aco ! Thli is entirely un- fair, but let ua look at it for a moment. A ehort time a«o there appeared an editorial In the Globe with reference to this matter, which was headed: A Foolteh PropoMl." and after suffreatlngr it was rumored that prohlbi- iionisu would remain away from the polls at the ceneral elections in order to lessen the vote necessary to carry the referendum, the Globe went on : iIon*lirto'rt«r!S.»*^K '2' *''• Gpverum..'nt, and we have no ides what its inten- loS te tm^}^\i^^^^J providing that Hhould the vote at the next general elec HhonWol the vote «f*iSJ**'V"V '° ^'**' ""■" "•" "'»'"» »' *•"« referendum »nch a c.,..rr,. hnt u **^,. ^* ''"''* "" '•»'"'' '""t the Government intend taking was anvTtP^L* tii^ *°V'^u'^.P"''''^^t'>' '''8'''™''* (or It to do self there methSi inl^SfJ I*"*'*"' "■* obtaining of a full expreaalon of opinion by the ineinoas auggeated In some quarter*. •■ * This was very sugKestlve at the time. It was understood, as I imagine «i Zt* "i**""^*** ^° •'« understood, as a warning to prohibitionists who mignt perhaps have some lingering remainti of attectlon for the Reform P»rty. that if they chose to remain away from the polls at the coming election their intentions in that respect could be thwarted, and would be tnwarted by the Government adopting Ihe auggestion outlined in the Globe, tnd to-day the honorable gentleman ^miounced that this threat is to be car- ried out. that the vote on which the referendum Is to be based, is the vote of the general election of 1898. and the honorable gentleman has retali- ated on those who suggested In order to relieve their sense of outraged dig- nity that they would avenge themselves on the Government by remaining away from the polls at the ge eral election. My honorable friend, the mem- oer for Brockvllle (Mr. Graham) in his newspaper bug^ested as follows : Ln»r«r J^lV in'''*,*'* *" .*■"" ''"' l>'"viJlnK that i.nly those who vote at the fceneral election will be entitled to .ot. ou the referendum In October. That suggestion has not. been carried out by the Government. They have confined themselves to the carrying out of the threat .vhlch they made that the vote might be taken on the vote of 1898 in order to prevent revenge be- Inr taken upon themselves with reference to their action upon this queestlon. Now, sir, the honorable gentleman {.Mr. Ross) this afternoon quoted from the Montreal Witness, an edltorl.il apparenily favoring the referendum. It has been suggested to me— I am not aware with liow much truth— that this editorial which he read, and which he \sas unable to give the date of. was written three days after the first reading of th.s bill, and that an editorial subseque 'tly published by the Witness was of a rather difTerent character. T have here a short clipping from an editorial of the Montreal Witness. "f which I cannot give the date either, but it Is within the last three or four weeks, in which that paper says: Deoiie IrnTp" fnr.„*!^"»" n°*' P'"V|'''>lti»" ■'« l.romlsr.i. the mnttt.- be referred to the this m vIPw n/ th« '„ \ '"*"'^"*'* referendum th- prohlhlllonlBts wonld look upon bad xSltb.*^Op'posUIo^n'''chee?8!r"'''^ °' * " «''^'"-'""'"'t «"• P"'* pusillanimity and So we have the testimony of the Montreal Witness also. Now, sir I snail not attempt at any length to rehearse the career of the honorable gen- tleman with regard to this question, .suffice It to say that in 1877 when an opportunity was offered for an expression by the people with regard to the preat question of general prohibition by means of a resolution in the House Of Commons of Canada, he stood up and barred the door, so that the pro- hibitionists were shut out from an attempt at any rate at that time, to have tbls question brought before the representatives of the people. Then In 1893 as I have detailed ,after the lapse of sixteen long years In which the I rovmce of Ontario and the Dominion of Canada remained still under the burden which it was carrying, when my honorable friend beside me (Mr. 25 r ?r I s r' Uarter) attempted to brine thta question up by meana of a bill the Govern- ment opposite, of which the honorable gentleman waa, as he Is now, a member took steps to again bar the door In the face of the prohlbttlon- ists of OnUrlo, and now after a distinct, speciflc and clear-cut promise that in the event of the Jurisdiction belnsr given by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, to the Legislature of Ontario to deal with this matter, action would be taken, the Qovemment, Instead of carrylnK out their promises in the simple and frank manner in which they were made, now say: " We will not do so, we will avoid the responsibility ourselves and ye will send this bill over to the people " to allow them to say whether they will have it ? No. sir, not to allow them to say whether they will hav, it. but loaded up with conditions and burdens which render St In their view, at any rate, practically Impossible that a majority of the people of this prov- ince shall be able to say whether oi not they are in favor of this measure. I say. Sir, this is not fulflling the promises which he and his predecessors gave. They did not nay anything of the kind that is proposed by this bill; they said they woulrt introduce a bill if Jurisdiction were given, they did not say if a bill after passing this House was passed by a majority of the people who voted at the previous elections that then It would become law, but they say now: " You can take it If you can get it, >ve wash our hands of all responsibility, and we do not propose to help you to get it. Sir, I was very much interested Indeed — it is al- ways a matter of Interest to listen to the honorable gentle- man speaking— and I was very much Interested indeed from beginning to end of his speech for various reasons, some of which I have attempted to delineate this afternoon, and one remaining reason to which I desire to call the attention of honorable members. The honorable gentleman, af- ter discussing the question of a two-thirds majority and three-fifths ma- jority, dlfTerent proposed majorities, looked around this House, sir, with that childlike and bland expression of his and said: "As for me, Mr. Speaker, I have always been in favor of a simple majority "-r-a simple ma Jorlty ! I will venture to say, sir, that what the honorable gentleman had In mind at that time was not a simple majority, but the simple people whom he thought he would be able to draw away from the actual facts of the simple majority which he was apparently suggesting. (Opposltiion cheers.) I have already shown you, Mr Speaker, perhaps at tedious length, that a majority which, under the provisions of this bill, will be ne- • cessary in order to pass it upon the referendum vote must be 60,000 at least more than was polled In favor of the prohibition plebiscite a year or more ago. That is Indeed the simple majority that Is required, and our people will indeed turn out to be a simple people in every sense of the word if that suggestion of the honorable gentleman is taken at the value at which he would desire it to be taken. A LIBERAL, VOICE ON THE REFERENDUM. Now, let me read to you a few words from a newspaper which is a leading organ of the Reform party in the Maritime Provinces, and if I am not r Istaken a paper formerly, and perhaps at present, controlled by the Hon. Mr. Fielding— I am not sure of that— the Halifax Chronicle. Its view of the question is one of the many reasons why we, who disagree with the present situation, have reason to congratulate ourselves on finding we are in company with all shades of po!' .cal and party feeling, not only m the Province of Ontario, but in the Dominion of Canada. What the Chronicle says is: So far as we are concerned we are entirely wlthoiit sympathy for either squirm- ing set of pultorlng politicians. It would iathit* mSumI renreMiitBtlTei to make their l«w». Thoee repr'-sen- Sl^b«T2S^Wr^?o'?.h^Ttherw»htmpunlt,. be Permitted, to «« b«ck oDordi^mob the tuie which hai been deJlberately committed to them at the pollt. 2Sd^e?tteya« well paid to perform. The plebiscite on one .pedal general SriicSto^-t ttaer^ fnrtlflable or ex.«.al.le. "'V'-^Bh even that M«m.do«bt- fni But the leferendnm. that la. the submission of a whole meaeure In aU lis SStoflaforoOTlllM^ldwatlon. la neither. It Is virions In prlnclp e and could 2S?fMl to OT"mS?2fwfg in practice under our policy Us only conf ''"^'e "Jf. 5^d be at a anbtertnge for tlme^aervlng politicians. Those who w .mid resort to U rttouM "eAf«e bS^ met with onmUtakable disapproval at the ve^ ootaet. Thrpo Itlctana have only to take a manly and hon. st stand on this ""bject for that matter to find solid' ground under their feet at once In "»/ P» .f ^helr Jwn Let them do this, or let the people trample thrm deeper In tho mire of th«r own makl^ Mther thin permit, much less help, them to escape from It by still more devious ways. (Opposition cheeis.) Sir, there is a legal way. there |8 a conBtltutlonal way, there Is a manly way. and the manly way must be the constitutional way and It happens to be the legal way. too; it 1p the duty of the Cabinet, of any British Government, to gauge the opinion of the people (Hear, hear, and Op- position cheers.) that is the principal reason for their existence as a Cab- inet. They are not to say, holding the position they do, responsible for the legislation and government of the country: " We will not attempt to decide upon matters of great moment, but leave them over to the people. The instincts and traditions of British Cabinet Government under our system are. that the Cabinet shall comprise a Committee of the Legislature, that they shall be given the duty, not only the power, but the duty, of framing necessary legislation for the people's representatives, a majority of whom are presumedly at their backs. They have no other purpose un- der our constitutional system, and It is their duty to decide whether or not any important measures, such as the Manhood Suffrage question, questions affecting educational matters, questions affecting municipal law. will be in the interests of the people for whom such la'-.s are made. T say that is why they exist, and there is no other reason for their exist nee under our constituUonal system, and they are not to say to the people: " Take a vote and let us see what you are going to do in this matter.' As I said a mo- ment ago. it is their duty to gauge the opinion of the people, and If they nnd they have gauged the opinion of the peopie properly, they will be sustained by the people, and if they find the opposite, they will be con- demned by the people. (Opposition cheers.) Thus in that way, and In that way only, the British constii tional sjstem of Cabinet Government can be worked out successfully to sue which will please the people of the Prov- ince of Ontario. (Opposltlo. :!rs.) TiiB MANLY COURSE. Let us see what would happen if the Government chose to take this man- ly and constitutional way. A great deal has been said and I agree with it, on the necessity, not the propriety merely, but on the absolute necessity, because experience has shown It, of having a larpe majority of public opin- ion behind any proposed measure of this kind. Sir, I entirely agree w:ith that for many reasons, none of which I will waste your time by attempting to detail here to-night, because everybody is more or less familiar with them. But let r.s see what would happen if the Government chose to take the constitutional way of doing things. This large majority of the people, which we all agree is necessary, honorabl-^ gentlemen say should be found by means of this so-called referendum, and the majority they are going to be content with is a maj >rlty of one over half the votes polled at a gen- tral election I do not understand that. Mr. Speaker, to be a very large ma- jority. But ppose for a moment that hoiorable gentlemen opposite had 27 M^ SL^^ . "^nrtbliuy Which U their., and of which they c«„ot dlvMt ri^SihZv T*"" ""^ "•*'' """• ^"""^ "»•' t»>.y cho.* to take Vhe S^fw" T '"^^ "'^' '^" *^« »»•»• "'» " * matter of Oovrn! n!lo^ will .e^',""^-' '•""' '=•"'- '*• "^ *"• »»»'«•"• view-either el S^P^Jntld I^'Tk '>'"-P°»«-»»"t '"PPO"* they take the flm view I our n^i^? ■ " *"*'' ''°"''* ■*»'= ■'"*^« P'^P"** th" bin aa a portion ot Houw^o^~^L „'^'""*- "« '»»J«"^ty were returned to thi, a nrnforitt T Oovemment. then thi. bill wouM be .upported by «n^ .; J^ . , ' *•*** '■ »<»* '"'^'y "> have .'^ne so uulew a oer- aTd "ZrllZtor ro'^SroTu'thTt IfTh'T'" "" ' ^'"''^ ^^^^U..LZ. were ■u.tain-rt ♦k .1 ' **** " **** Oovemment took that stand and J^ much UrTer th.n T"^*"^'!: **"' """"^ ""^^ '« '*^'"' »' t^l. bill would n^tXueveon thin rr"°"*' "^J"'""'' °' the total vote. We do honor^We lentlPm '''* "'""* ****' ^''^ "'^"'"'^ '" *"»- House of hav^nfiLidtharrv '■*'"■'"'!?'" »»>*"■»""»' »»*•>«>•«« before the people, but voteof iMSiitoK/th r ^' "'■"'"'"" "■■' """ '"""•■*»« ^••"^ I mean/ThlB Jorltv In thi- « *"* ''°*^- Honorable gentlemen have a certain ma- fhe"r-o?e'oT?hr;eoX TT""' T ' ""f •"''"•*• ^'^'^^ ^»'" -•'--»^- would be «iven t„ t^ represents a majority of 16.000, and more which Trt mrJLm u "* "" *''^*'' P'^t^"™ °' *hich this bill would form a ES!ow\h '"^' *"'' '•*"" thepeopie of this province would h^ve vm .r« Jo T '' *''""'*** ''"^*' ^h*^ ^''"■b 't Is not suggested even they bVu T' ^0^7' irztr"''''TJ^'' °' ""''"" opi'nforbernd ?h*r z ^^C^^^^^^^^^^^^ir^^^:^, sr;;^jrw.rrLv:: ^u^ tr et:^j-risr r tnr%r r i%-r "'^-'^ Propeny adnurtlre'r aTat" ru^on" our^^Tbj; a^l^f ^o te^^n^: '^ w'ldTT^stL^Ti^rtn^T*^ "'^ bill vr the "o^'em"™:; tbe tou, rro:;tTa%rarei:c't;:; r; t''hrprov°;;cr''^ '^-^-^ ^' NO ADVOCACY OF THE SIEASURB. Sir, another remarkable thing that I noticed with r^r»r»n^m. ♦» ♦•.- v- ^^JughtThatT? '"^^ '""^ ^'^^- '^'- ^""^ ^'' SIUTr; * s^'t'hif a thought that to-day perhaps he would refer to It as he failed to do .n nTth. occasion of his moving the first reading of the bim he harnot^ far «M one word In contemplation of the purpcses and objects of th" b" andTr vou^WeTo rtLu ^T °' •'• '*"• "'' '""^ "'•"">''^- »' '^ has "Len o wh^^h H .u • ***" " * "'^'■^ mechanical act of the Government in Thi L ,"'■ ''!?'' ^"^ "°* interested in any way. (Hear. hear, and apprause^ ir^ thit i/T. T. ^''^ '^'^- '"" """^ gentlemen are found yet who In- that t,^ V * '"'■*"'>»»« *♦""« '«»• the prohlbltlonit party in this province IS the^Ide^f 'thi'o'^''' °' '"^ Government the honorable gentlemTn S 18 the leader of this Government, and even as he brings In this measure 38 ap with tb« burdam which win randsr It Impoflalbl* for thia eompatl. tor to win In the m». «van than thay turn th«>lr ayea to him with •doratlOB Ilka tha dyln» *ladl*tor, and thay cry. •• Dyln«. wa aalute thea." (Oppoal- Uon chaara.) It la one of the remarkable Ucta which haa come to light dur- ing tha dlacuaalon both In the preaa and In thla Houae with reference to thia quaatlon. My honorable friend said the other dity that he, like Henry Clay, would rather be right than be preeldrnt. Why, r.lr. cannot my honorable friend (In a political aenae, of courae), be honest? Wlv can he not be honest? Why cannot he be bold In a cauM which he declar'^a to be right and pro- per for the welfare of hla fellow men In thia province of oura? Why ahould we be treated here to such an exhibition as he gave the other day, when he wlttlni^y or unwittingly succeeded at any rate for the time being In de- ceiving the Houae and tha country with reference to every point that was made by him, when hla entire argument, when every one of his long series of quoUtlona conaiated of a long series of misrepresentations with refer- ence to the facts as the compilation has shown hrre In detail? Mr. Speaker. I would Bay to my honorable friend that his punishment probablv has como now. It la not for me to dilate upon that. But it certainly la time that aome recompense should be given by him for what he has received, and for which he ha« given In return less than nothing indeed. Sir, no man In this country, I apprehend, to-day realises more thoroughly than the honorable gentleman that "black care alts evtr behind the horseman." and I think he will And, and those who are endeavoring to bolster up the position which he endeavors to assume here with reference to this question will find, that punishment wUl come In the end, that, the mills of God grind slowly but they grind exceedingly small." THH B. N. A. ACT. Now, Blr, If honorable gentlemen will bear with me, I desire to go back for a moment to my remarka on the question of the British North America Act. and refer to the debates In the House at that time. On Its being proposed to lefer that measure to the people. Sir John Macdonald said:— By what contrivance known to onr <.. II stltnl Ion cohI.I wp take such a votp' There Is none Ruch. Tht-re U no means, no Hvsteni. l>v n hich wp conlcl make an ap ff i?i 11?* ''''"' """^ '" "'^'*''" '" ••" '* ^'^ "liool'l hnvp to Hulivpit the principles of the British conMtitntlon. The honorable Kcntlpni:in knows thorp Is no means of do- lug It. We might Indeed pass a law dp measure of this kind whldi would be a subversion of the first principles of British constttutlonnl uoverninent. Then, Sir John Macdonald Is one of the statesmen who was quoted by my honorable friend as being In favor of the referendum. Sir Macken- zie Bowell put a quietus upon any further attempts to use him. and now we have had a quotation from Sir John Macdonald's own words. One other ref- erence, and I shall be practically through. I have a distinct recollection of a debate In which my hororable friend, the Premier, took part, when the then mamber for one of the Yorks, Mr. Boultbee, desired to amend the Scott Act. In the direction of requiring a certain majority or a certain number to vote In order to bring It Into force, and my recollection of the position taken byi my honorable friend, In which he will correct me if I am wrong, was that ne opposed the doctrine altogether, and among other Illustrations of the propriety of It my honorable friend asked Mr. Boultbee to apply It and aea how It would work out t hen applied to the votes In the House of Com- mons. I a«k the honorable gentleman how he would like to have hit* prin- ciple applied to the vote of the House of Commons, so that a certain ma- jority of membera of that House would be required to vote for a certain «9 ■MMon btfort It would b« aUowed to boeooM a tow oC tbo tond. I trad I taTO ahowB raeoMMrfnUjr that aU tho arfttOMBts ud •vtborltlw by Ihr bononbto Mond. tlthtr do not apiriy. or that praetlcally aU tato alto- ■atloaa art oontrary to tta* facts, and I aMumo with groat ooafldtnc* that I have oliown cloarlr Ftrat. that tho rtfortndnm has no ptooo In our ayatom, and cannot bo a^ pUad undor It i 8M!ond. tho vott rMiulrod to carry the bUl la an unfair condition, la utterly ornoaod to tha theory and practice of tho refarandum wara It In operation, and la Intandtd to kUl the bill. 8lr, an axpreaalon of public opinion under our ayatem would be of groat- or volume and more condualve. THIS BILL IB NOT PROHIBITION. Now, a few words In concIuHlon aa to the bill outalde of the referendum. It la not prohibition, aa the Chrlatlan Guardian truly aaya. Let ua atart with that propraltlon. We cannot have prohibition In a province. Let that fact, becaube it la a fact, sink down into our inner conaciouaneoa, aa we endeavor to come to a reaaonable concluaion on the merlta of thia queation. What we will have under thla bill la Juat what I deacribed a while ago In the begin- ning of my addreaa thla afternoon, and It la thia, we will have what la de- acribed here by my honorable friend, the leader of thia Government and the promoter and propoaer of thia bill, when be aaya: "What we propoae to aek la not, ahall we prohibit the retail aale of Intoxicating llquora. That would be but a amall matter. The bar-rooma are bad enough, Ood know% but they are not aa bad aa the canteen in the private homea." (Oppooition cheem.) " While the retail traffic waa prohibited there would be permitted that whole- aale trafllc, which would reault in a man carrying hia demijohn home by night and drinking it with hia wife at hia own flreaide." That la what thia bill propoaea to give, and It would be practically tho Scott Act over again. MR. WHITNEY'S PBRSONAL EXPERIBNCB. When the Scott Ant came up for cocalderation in the Province of On- tario I voted for the adoption of the S:ott Act: I felt In common with the great maaa of public opinion, perhaps not extreme In either direction, that tho drink evil In thla province waa of to great a character and moment that It would Juatlfy experlmenta being mad ) in order to arrive at aome reaaon- able way of obviating that evil, and ao In company with thoiuanda of men In the Province of Ontario I voted in favor of the Scott Act. I proaecuted for a Ucenae inspector for a year, and what I aaw and what I know occurred I ahall not take up your time in detailing here. But, air, I have the aatlafac- tion of knowing that when the time came I, along with the aame great vol- um« of people in the Province of Ontario, who had become convinced agalnet their wllla that the Scott A£t was evil instead of good in Ita effecta, went to the poUa and voted openly and honeatly againat the Scott Act (Opposition cheers). The evila which are so graphically detailed by the honorable gentle- man in the language which I have Juat quoted, are evils which I believe would result from the adoption of this meaaure, and, therefore, air, I believe the effect of this bill— and I am now speaking of it outside the referendum- would be bad. Let me repeat, I approach the consideration of this quea- tion with, I believe, an honest desire to ao act with regard to It aa to leasen as far aa possible the evila which It lapropoaed to deal with by this bill. I be- lieve that no man worthy the name of a good citizen, who understands and realizes the nature and extent of this great evil, can fall also to realize that It la hia duty to bend hia energies— not In a narrow or bigoted spirit, but 30 ) wttb bwUm towM«i BOM and ohuity to all-towarda tho Mhttton of tbta great problam. As a f««bl« attwnpt to do what I oonaldor to b« my duty. I, tborwfora, tor tbo nmmmm I haro Mt forth, declare: TH« OPPOSITION POLICT, That I am oppoaad to tbta blU on account of tho unoomitltutlonality and Improprloty of the ao-called referendum, which la an Ule«ttimato application of a baatard propoaltlon to our Oovernmtntui eyatcm (Oppoaltlon applatue), and alao on account of the unjuat and unfair condition! attached to It. Also, that I am oppoaed to the bill on the morlta of It ouUide of and without reference to the ao-caUed referendum. We cannot have prohibition In a province, therefore. It la Idle to dlsouaa that remedy. I believe the remedy Ilea rather In uirinff the powers that we poaaeao. namely, wholeaome reatrictlon; a decreaae In the number ot Ilcenaea; removing thoae charged with the admlniatratlon of the law fttrni political and party Inttuencea, and honeatly enforcing the law. Therefore, 1 am prepared to aupport. and to Introduce and paaa, ahould the opportunity oCter, leglalatlon to— (1) Decreaae the number of Ilcenaea. (S) Maintain Intact and allow no relaxation of the restrictions. («) Remove the oommlaelonera and Inapectora from political and party influencea; and (4) Enforce the ticenae law honeatly and with the whole power of the Oovernment (Oppoaltlon cheera.) We, of the Oppoaltlon, are here to criticise, and not to propoae, and I might have refrained from thua announcing my poaltlon on thia question, and have declared that, when the opportunity offered, I would be ready to aettle It in a constitutional way. There are precedenta to Juatify such a course. I might have followed the example of Sir Wilfrid Tiaurier, former- ly a " Democrat up to the hilt." who retired behind the formidable Unes of Torres Vedrae, to wait comfortably, as he did, for the opportunity to arrive. I believe I would have been Justified, constitutionally, In ao doing. But, atr, be it wise or foolish on my part, I will not hide, no matter in what distin- guished company I might find myself were I to do so. I prefer to be " honest enougit to be bold, and bold enough to be honest," let the consequen- ces be what they may. (I.oud cheers.) As a party we know well what we may be called upon to face in tho com- ing elections. Judging by the acts of our opponents, which are being un- masked from day to day by the court in one of the cities of the province, we may be again confronted by an awful saturnalia of fraud and crime, such aa that by means of which the honorable gentleman and his colleagues occupy their positiona, and are not ashamed, while every one of the wretches whose work placed them where they are goes unwhipt of Justice. We may not succeed in obtaining power. I am, however, prepared to take the responalbllity for my attitude on thi.i auestlon, and to face whatever the future may bring, but T do believe that I can aee beyond the excitement and agitation which has been caused by dealing with this great moral question as a political football, and I believe the people wJio love honesty and fair dealing will Justify the position which— on my honor and on my conscience— I have felt Impelled to take, and from which 1 shall not recede. (Loud applause.) I thank the House, both aides of it, for the patience with which they have listened to my long and perliaps discursive address, wUch I shall conclude by stating that I feel It my duty to vote asalnot the second reading of this bill. (Loud and continued applause.) 31 thnmvhoat tlMpTOTtaflT^ M«ut«iy prohibttliw muateetnr* m« m* JVom tlM Toroato Olote. Juuair U. MM: •PI>iM to^uSto^lSlSSto!,^'SSdSi"J2'^rH".^'!",."••» Pta- could b. ^^^ou»h7» M.*^ vSrT^T*^ '?J??°*" •*• '••trtct the liquor traffic. y'tthtntST^S^Jrt^'J^^^^LS!S^^^^'}^^^ • «•«* •• » dHaMiw ptac* licciMM, — i nit fKSS ■fhiiTrrii'^^ * rttuatlon ta a forthor rMtrictioa of "So (mmvL iK '*^ Sf T*"* •* *••• wpport of th« conatrr at lam* cauM of ria0loBm\SSL!!L t, "''??!!??"• ¥'■• ?'»▼•"•'• munincMice Ir tho IU« Mratlfl«!Sm\JS^^°!^ *"• UMwmrln* loyalty to tho Mothodlat Church. B€««. haTe^JSd? W^«i^*^*^'**7°"' movement, and hto Interrlty In btSl- c«T^ u^Sa ^iJSt **"• "*'*"«»■» •"*" "» «»»« province, and hl« rUmt ;;Mr. Flavrtlo lald:- •rnmMi*. TJi^i -iS^'*"*^**'*'* absence of consc ence on the part of Gov- ^SSttJ^^-IS*,^""'*'^":'"' **» '*««-I«»ly enforce a prohlbK taX ■£-..' XiM- O^G^e^j. ^^cunA 3a