IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-S) 
 
 % J 
 
 v.. 
 
 % 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 
 2.5 
 
 2.2 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 JA III 1.6 
 
 V] 
 
 <^ 
 
 /i 
 
 o^. 
 
 ^r 
 
 
 /J 
 
 'W 
 
 O 
 
 7 
 
 
 ra? 
 
w- 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
 1980 
 
Technical Notes / Notes techniques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Physical 
 features of this copy which may alter any of the 
 images in the reproduction are checked below. 
 
 >/ 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couvertures de couleur 
 
 L'Institut a microfilrnd le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Certains 
 ddfauts suscepfjbles de nuire d la quality de la 
 reproduction sont notds ci-dessous. 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 1 
 c 
 c 
 
 a 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes gdographiques en couleur 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured plates/ 
 Planches en couleur 
 
 1 
 f 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages ddcolordes, tachetdes ou piqudes 
 
 Tight binding (may cause shadows or 
 distortion along interior margin)/ 
 Reliure serrd (peut causer oe I'ombre ou 
 de la distortion le long de la marge 
 int^rieure) 
 
 D 
 
 
 
 Show through/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommag^es 
 
 ^ 
 ii 
 u 
 b 
 f( 
 
 n 
 
 Additional comments/ 
 Commentaires suppldmentaires 
 
 Bibliographic Notes / Notes bibliographiques 
 
 n 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli6 avec d'autias documents 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 Pagination incorrect/ 
 Erreurs de pagination 
 
 Pages missing/ 
 Des pages manquent 
 
 □ 
 
 Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 Plates missirg/ 
 
 Des planches manquent 
 
 D 
 
 Maps missing/ 
 
 Des cartes gdographiques manquent 
 
 D 
 
 Additional comments/ 
 Commentaires suppldmantaires 
 
The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall 
 contain the symbol — *► (meaning CONTINUED"), 
 or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whici^ever 
 applies. 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettetd de I'exemplaire filmi, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparattra sur la der- 
 nidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: 
 le symbole — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole 
 V signifie "FIN". 
 
 The original copy was borrowed from, and 
 filmed with, the kind consent of the following 
 institution: 
 
 Scott Library, 
 
 York University 
 
 Maps or plates too large to be entirely included 
 in one exposure are filmed beginning in the 
 upper left hand corner, left to right and top to 
 bottom, as many frames as required. The 
 following diagrams illustrate the method: 
 
 L'exemplaire filmd fut reproduit grfice d la 
 g6ndrosit6 de I'dtablissement prdteur 
 suivant : 
 
 Scott Library, 
 
 York University 
 
 Les cartes ou les planches trop grandes pour dtre 
 reproduites en un seul clichd sont filmdes d 
 partir de Tangle supdrieure gauche, de gauche d 
 droite et die haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images n^cessaire. Le diagramme suivant 
 illustre la mdthode : 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
"w^J-y 
 
 Pfll 
 
 •% :.iWl9^ 
 

 ff'gsssg^^wegr'giiiLUJi'! 'H—^?-^ 
 
 » ■■' ... ' .a. i J.llLB eyr, 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 OP 
 
 Mr ,J. CHARLTON, M. P., 
 
 ON 
 
 JESUITS' ESTATES ACT, 
 
 DEMVKHED lli THE 
 
 HOFSE OF COMMONS, 
 
 OTT^^CV-A^. 
 
 01^ THURSDAY, MAKCH 28tli, 1889, 
 
 OTTAWA: 
 > i^ THE QtJEKN'S PliiyTKI^^ COMPra JIJ.EB OF STATIONBRT. 
 
 A. Senecai.^ Sqpeiintend^git Of Printing, 
 
 ^,..._ „.„,. igs>A ; _ ■_ , '■ _^_ ., .._ 
 
 lllji l l liM ll ' upWii 
 
 
 Jt. 
 
IKSiS^HB-TSI^JS^K' 
 
 
 \ t. 
 

 
 " j"' -s^i 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 or 
 
 Mr. J. CHARLTON, M.P., 
 
 ON 
 
 JESUITS' ESTATES ACT, 
 
 BILITIBID IN THS 
 
 HOUSE OF COMMONS, 
 
 ON THURSDAY, MARCH 28th, 1889, 
 
 Mr. OHAKLTON. I feel called upon, before recording 
 the vote I shall give upon the motion now in your hands, 
 to explain the reasons that will actuate me in voting for 
 that motion/ ^ feel that, in doing this, I am separating 
 myself fronr tbei^iajority of my friends in this House, that 
 I am acting with a minority, and probably with a very 
 small mino^i^, of its members ; and, were I to look at 
 this questiS^ purely from the standpoint of its value in 
 votes, I should no doubt feel perfectly content to give a 
 silent vote, and a vote with the majority. My convictions, 
 however, forbid my voting in this way. I realise that tie 
 position I take is an unpopular one in this House. I realise, 
 also, that the position 1 take will quite possibly send me to 
 private life after the expiration of this Parliament but I feel 
 bound from conviction of duty to take the course I propose 
 to take in reference to this matter. Many of the gentlemen 
 who have addressed the House upon this question have 
 professed to be able *o do so entirely independent of all 
 feeling of a religious character. They have professed to be 
 able to divest themselves of all prejudices or bias resulting 
 rom their religious belief. I do not know that I will claim 
 

 to be able to do this. I presame that I am swayed and 
 influenced in the course I take in this matter by 
 my education, by my religious belief, and I ap- 
 proach the consideration of this question, I an* free to 
 admit, from the standpoint and influenced by the belief of a 
 Protestant; and, although I shall endeavor to be, and I 
 believe I shall succeed in being, impartial in this matter, I 
 do not, I repeat, believe I shall be able to divest myself en- 
 tirely of all influences that religious training and religious 
 belief may be calculated to exert in reference to it. I 
 feel that this is a question of very great importance, 
 and one of far-reaching consequence, and I feel that it is 
 a question upon which men should act from conviction, up* 
 on which men should act in the way they believe they are re- 
 quired to act in the best interests of their country and for 
 the purpose of securing the best results as to the future wel- 
 fare and the future well-being of that country. This ques- 
 tion has been discussed from a legal standpoint fully and 
 ably. The views of those who are opposed to the action of 
 the Government in this matter, the views of those who will 
 support the motion of my hon. friend from Muskoka (Mr. 
 O'Brien), were most ably presented to the House and 
 to the country by the hon. member for North Sim- 
 coe (Mr. McCarthy). The defence of the Government 
 was made in a brilliant and able effort by the Minister of 
 Justice, and the effort of the Minister of Justice was ably 
 seconded by the scholarly and profound argument of the 
 hon. member for Bothwell (Mr. Mills). I shall not attempt 
 to traverse the ground traversed by these gentlemen. 
 My education perhaps does not flt me for an exhaustive 
 disquisition upon the character of th's measure from a legal 
 standpoint, and I shall endeavor to present the case from a 
 layman's standpoint, and to present the reasons which influ- 
 ence me in the course which I shall take upon this great 
 question. 
 
 There is one feature of this case that has not yet been 
 dwelt upon, at least, to any considerable extent — I refer 
 to the peculiar ethnologic conditions of this Dominion. 
 When the younger Pitt, in 1191, erected the two Provinces 
 in Canada, granting to one Province the use of the French 
 language, French laws, French customs and institutions, 
 giving to the other Province the English language, English 
 laws, and English institutions, avowedly for the purpose of 
 creating two rival, jealous, and, in a sense, hostile Pro- 
 vinces, that the catastrophe that had occurred a few years 
 before, when the thirteen colonies revolted from the British 
 Crown, might not recur again ; when, I say, that he erected 
 
 .k 
 
these two Provinces npon these divergent lines for this 
 avowed purpose, he certainly succeeded most admirably in 
 creating two Provinces with mutual contrasts in language 
 and in the essential characteristics of nationality. These 
 Provinces are not only divei'se in race and in language, but 
 also in religion, and the dominant church in the Province 
 ol Quebec is a political factor of the voky highest importance 
 in ihis Dominion. It naturally exercises its power and its 
 great influence for the purpose of forwarding its own interests 
 and designs. It does this, Sir, with sleepless vigilance, it 
 does it with consummate ability, and it has been enabled to 
 exercise a most powerful influence upon the destinies and 
 upon the politics of the Dominion of Canada. Now, Sir, as 
 I say, this power is exerted for the furtherance of its par- 
 poses, as is most natural. I do not complain of this, I do 
 not say that it is to be expected that any other course would 
 be taken by the French Catholic Chur'ih of Canada, I would 
 not say that it was in the interest of Canada, but it is not 
 unnatural that the church should do this. Tho Minister 
 of Justice last night, in the course ot his speech on this 
 question, in defending Mr. Mercier in tho course ho has 
 taken in regard to the Jesuit estates, alluded to one fact 
 which exemplifies, in the most vivid light imaginable, the 
 great influence and power of that church in the Province 
 of Quebec. He told us that the Jesuit estates, held by tho 
 Government of Quebec to be Government property, held by 
 them to be a property in which the Jesuits* fraternity had 
 no legal right, to which they had no legal claim, notwith- 
 standing the position of the Government in regard to these 
 estates, the Government was unable to sell this property, 
 that it had been offered for sale and no purchasers oould 
 be procured. Why, Sir? Because the power of this church 
 was so great that men did not dare, or would not, as they 
 were deterred by the influence of the church, purchase 
 this property ; the power of this church was so great that 
 estates held by the Government to bo the property of the 
 Crown, to be a property to which the church and the 
 Jesuit fraternity had no legal claims, could not be sold in 
 consequence of the opposition of the church to their sale. 
 Well, nothing could exemplify more vividly the great influ- 
 ence of this society than this fact referred to by the Min- 
 ister of Justice. 
 
 Sir, I referred, a moment ago, to the peculiar ethnologic 
 conditions of this Dominion. Now. no man, I presume, in 
 this House or in this country, would for a moment assert 
 that it was not in the interest of the country that homo- 
 geneity, that assimilation, should be promoted. But the 
 li 
 
question is, how can this resalt be obtained ? How can the 
 diverse races of this Dominion be made homogeneous, how 
 can they be made to assimilate ? It is desirable that such 
 should be done. Every man who wishes to see the Dominion 
 of Canada become a great nation, must desire to see the 
 races occupying this country acting in concert, acting in 
 harmony, and to a much greater extent than at present 
 made homogeneous. I hold, Mi. Speaker, that any measure 
 that will retard the realisation of this desire for the 
 assimilation of these races, that any measure that will, 
 on the contrary, have a tendency to set them wider asunder, 
 that will have a tendency to create and foster animosi- 
 ties and the jealousies that are natural to the existence of 
 two such races, is a measure that should be deprecated, is a 
 measure that should be opposed by every lover of his 
 country in this Dominion. Now, events as they are 
 developed have hitherto had a tendency, in some respects, 
 to put these two races wider apart, and this very tendency, 
 in face of the desire of those who wish to see a homogeneous 
 people and a great nation, this very tenoenoy to drive 
 these two races apart, awakens alarm in the breasts of tens 
 of thousands of people in this country ; and the desire to 
 avert this tendency, the desire to bring the races nearer 
 together, to secure greater harmony and action between 
 them, is a patriotic desire, by whomsoever it may be enter- 
 tained. 
 
 Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). As in Ireland. 
 
 Mr. CHARLTON. Not as in Ireland, but as in Canada, 
 with the hopes of the future before us, with the desire to 
 create a great nation, with a desire to have a nation, not 
 inhabited by two races pulling in difiPerent directions, jealous 
 of each other, and seeking, the one to crowd the other 
 out of the race, not as in Ireland, hut as wo hope to see it in 
 Canada, with every influence set aside that would work 
 against the realisation of this dream. Now, Sir, there are 
 in the agitation that exists to day, great forces beneath the 
 surface ; there are nndercurrents that we do not lqc, the 
 power of which, perhaps, we do not realise ; there is an under- 
 current that is proceeding from this very desire that this 
 should be a homogeneous people, a desire to lift this nation 
 up to a higher plgno with a common purpose, to create a 
 great free state. |^he question that agitates the mind of 
 the people, that creates the interest in this matter which 
 we are discussing here to-day, is, shall the Dominion of 
 Canada be Saxon or shall it be Celtic ? Or shall it be both 
 Saxon and Celtic for all time to come ? Shall the two races 
 
live together in harmony, or shall they live apart ? Shall 
 this bo one country, or shall there be a disruption ? The 
 question is one of groat magnitude, the question is one the 
 importance of which cannot be overestimated, and the 
 issue, Sir, is one that cannot be shirked. Now, these are 
 British Provinces, The design was that these should be 
 Anglo-Saxon commonwealths, and the tendency to foster an 
 intense spirit of French nationality, a tendency made more 
 pronounced by the fact that that nationality has a national 
 church which naturally fosters that fooling in the promo- 
 tion of its own interests, is a tendenoy that we must all 
 deprecate, is a tendency that we do not wish to see aggra- 
 vated, is a tendency that those who have the good of their 
 country at heart would rather see mitigated if not remove31 
 
 Mr. AMYOT. Oh I oh ! 
 
 Mr. CHARLTON. My hon. friend on my left laughs. 
 Well, perhaps he would not with to see it removed, perhaps 
 he would rather see the difficulties intensified. I would 
 rather see them removed ; I would rather see these two races 
 live in harmony, I would rather see them drawing closer 
 together. I have every respect for the institutions of 
 Quebec ; I realise that the character of its institutions, the 
 nature of its laws, and the cast of its society is, in some 
 respects, mediaeval rather than modern, but I have every 
 sympathy for Quebec, and I have no desire to interfere 
 with that Province in the leat^t. 
 
 Mr. CURBAN. You do it all the same. 
 
 Mr. CHARLTON. Sir, I do not propose to do it all the 
 same. I feel that if we desire to promote harmony between 
 these races, the introduction of a society that sedulously 
 fosters the seeds of discord, the history of which in every 
 state of Christendom has shown that it is in its nature an 
 organisation against constituted authority is a great mis- 
 fortune—Sir, as a lover of this country, as a»mun desiring 
 to see harmony in this country, I deprecate the introduction 
 of that society into the political circles of Canad.i. It is 
 for that reason that I, and thousands in this Dominion, 
 deprecate the introduction of that society, deprecate the 
 action of the Government in permitting the incorporation 
 of that society and in permitting its endowment, foreseeing, 
 as they believe they do foresee, in those actions future mis- 
 chief and future disaster to this country. This its my belief. 
 
 Now, Sir, it is true that the Protestants of this country 
 have been supine and nerveless for many years past as 
 regards public questions. They have been for many years 
 
6 
 
 f)a8t without organisation to guard thoir own interests and 
 ibertios, and until quite recently there has been no dis- 
 tinctive and pronounced Protestant organ. Both the great 
 political parties in this country have sought to obtain French 
 Catholic support. The solidarity of the Catholic French 
 party has enabled them to hold the balance of power; they 
 have held it, they have exorcibed it for the advantage of 
 their race and for the advi»ntage of their religion, to some 
 extent at least ; and in the manipulation of this element, 
 and in the influence wielded by this element, it reminds me 
 at every turn of the history of the United States when the 
 slave power — I make the comparison in no other sense 
 except that they were a minority, and acted for their 
 common interest— controlled the United States for 40 years, 
 although they possessed only about one-third of the votes in 
 the House of Eepresontatives, coiiirolled the United States 
 because they acted in their own interests at every turn, and 
 supported first one party and then the other as circum- 
 stances incident to their own requirement made it neces- 
 sary to do. We have had the Protestants, as I have said, 
 without an organ, without an organisation, and not awake 
 to their interests, and it is only of recent days that the 
 people are awakening to the danger which, in the estima- 
 tion of many Protestants, threaten them in this country. 
 
 I make no apology for being an Anglo-Saxon. I do 
 not consider it a disgrace, I do not consider it even a 
 disadvantage. I look back to the history of the race with 
 pride, I look back to the history of that mother of nations 
 — England — and I think it is a glorious hibtory. I think 
 her institutions are good institutions and that she has 
 been a blessing to the world, and I have no apology to make 
 for saying that I believe it. I make no apology for saying 
 that, so far as my own Province is concerned, 1 would resist 
 the introduction of that system which is peculiar to your 
 Province, Mr. Speaker. I make no apology for saying that, 
 in my belief, ^ivil and religious liberty should be carefully 
 guarded, and any encroachment upon that civil and reli- 
 gious liberty should be resisted, resisted strongly, resisted 
 vigorously, resisted with courage and ret ' <ted without com- 
 promise. As regards Quebec, of cours. .here are certain 
 things there that I would not select as a matter of choice. 
 I do not, for instance, think it a very great advantage to 
 pay tithes ; I am unable to see any advantage in fabrique 
 assessments, in a church absorbing the wealth of the country 
 and in Its property being exempted from taxation ; but it 
 is none of ray business. I do not propose to interfere with 
 
 * 
 
An hoD. ME MB 10 11. Hear, hear. 
 
 Mr. CHAULTON, If the hon, gontloman can rioo any- 
 blessing in that, ho is at liberty to enj>y it. But I would 
 interfere and resist any attempt to impot^e it upon a coun- 
 try where it wan not in existence at the time ; I would feci 
 that to hi my duty. Now. M.r. Speaker, I do not nay this 
 in any offensive sense. Men disagree, men have different 
 opinions, men differ in politics, and in religion, and in what 
 they beliflve to be lor the T>ublio interest, and they have a 
 right to do so, and they will continue to do so until the end 
 of time. 
 
 The Minister of Justice, last night, in referring to old 
 English law, dwelt at very great length on the subject 
 of obsolete laws. I almost imagined before he had con- 
 cluded that there was scarcely a law in existence that was 
 not obsolete, and that we wore scarcely bound by anything 
 on the Statute-book of England. But I think the Great 
 Charter is not obsolete, that charter upon which we have 
 built our liberties, upon which we have constructed British 
 institutions, that charter under which we have responsible 
 goveriiment and parliamentary representation, with the 
 people, through their representatives, controlling the 
 expenditure of the country. The Bill of JRighta is not 
 obsolete ; it is in force yet. The supremacy of the Crown, 
 SB the embodiment of the power and majesty of the people, 
 is not obsolete. The safeguards of liberty designed by our 
 forefathers to preserve us from encroachments are not 
 obsolete, and the spirit of liberty is not obsolete among the 
 English-speaking race. And it is for this reason, that the 
 spirit of liberty exists, that the safeguards of liberty are in 
 force, that tens of thousands of men have risen in Canada 
 within the last two months to oppose the endowment of 
 that order, whose interests and character we are discussing 
 in this debate, and whose character and record I hold it 
 proper and necessary to discuss and examine in the broadest 
 sense possible. I hold that the incorporation of this 
 order lies at the root of all this trouble. And it is owing 
 to the fact to which I called attention a few moments ago, 
 that there existed among the Protestants a great degree of 
 Bupinoness, and nervelessness, and of blindness to their 
 own interests and the interests of their country, that the 
 incorporation of that>tfder was not resented at the time and 
 was not prevented, j Why, a few years ago, in 1873, the 
 Orange Order was^corporated by the Legislature of 
 Ontario. The Lieutenant Governor of that Province, who 
 was appointed by the right hon. gentleman opposite. 
 
8 
 
 . i 
 
 withheld that Bill from asBent ; I am unable to 
 say whether by private advices he was in- 
 structei to do so or not, but he withheld it. But we 
 had here the incorporation of the Order of Jesuits two 
 years ago without any withholding of the Bill from assent, 
 without any interference on the part of the Government^ 
 and it seems to me a monstrous thing that so loyal an 
 order as the Orange Order, for it is unquestiocably loyal, 
 should be denied incorporation and the Jesuits should be 
 permitted incorporatlonl It reminds mo of a story, to the 
 effect that an Irishmai), on landing in New York, was 
 attacked by a dog, and endeavored to pick up one of the 
 paving stones, whereupon, on failing to do so, he said : It is a 
 queer free country this, where the dogs are let loose and the 
 stones are chained down. This is a queer sort of justice that 
 incorporates the Jesuit Order and denies incorporation to 
 the Orangemen ; and I think, while I opposed at the time 
 the incorporation of the Orangemen, on the ground that it 
 would produce dissensions and troubles, the same reason* 
 should have held good in the case of the Jesuit Order as well. 
 The Minister of Justice, last night, held that the Jesuit 
 Order had, in effect, already been incorporated. He 
 instanced the case of the incorporation of the St, 
 Mary's College, which had Jesuit professors, and 
 he contended that because the clergy, forsooth, were 
 Jesuits, this was incorporation, in point of faot, of 
 the Jesuit Onier. If a college happened to have 
 three or four infidel professors, would it be the incorporation 
 of the infidel order, or if the college had a few Presbyterian 
 professors, would it bo the incorporation of the Presbf- 
 terian order? The assumption was preposi erous. The 
 Minister of Justice also said that the order had previously 
 been incorporated. If the society was incoiporated in a 
 surreptitious manner it affords me reason for saying that it 
 should not have been done^ whether it was done or not. 
 Now, Mr. Speaker, the character of the Jesuit Order is a 
 matter, in my opinion, which should receive the attention 
 of this Houhe, and the attention of this country. My hon. 
 friend, the Minister of Justice, last night spoke somewhat 
 sneeringly of Parliament revolving itself into a committee 
 for the examination of theological questions, and my hon. 
 friend, the member for Both well (Mr. Mills), asserted that 
 Parliament had not the right to constitute itself an ecclesi- 
 astical council, to judge the Jesuits. Well, Sir, Parliament, in 
 this matter, is neither constituting itself i nto a committee for 
 the trial of a theological question, nor into an eoclesiastioal 
 council for the trial of the Jesuit Order, but Parliament is 
 
 
called upon, under the cirourastances, to examine into the 
 moral and the political tendencies of the order that [^ on 
 trial before the people of this country. It has the right to 
 do 80, it has more than the right to do it; it is the bounden 
 duty of Parliament to enquire as to the character of 
 this organisation, to enquire as to whether those 
 various charges made against this organisation in history 
 for more than 300 years are true, or if any of these 
 charges are true, whether it has proved to be an or- 
 ganisation detrimental to the interests of liberty, in 
 every generation and in every age, or not, and if ita 
 antecedents are such as they are represented to be, it 
 should be the duty of Parliament to examine thoroughly 
 the question of whether that order is now what it was 
 before. It is a question of the utmost importance * it is not 
 a theological question ; it is not an ecclesiastical question, 
 but it is a question of the highest moment to the State. It 
 is a question which should engage the attention of every 
 statesman in the. country; it is a question that has an inti- 
 mate bearing upon the welfare of this country, and I pro- 
 pose. Sir, to examine that question. I propose to examine 
 it, not that I think I am making myself a member of a 
 committee to examine into theological tenets, not that I 
 propose to make myself a member of an ecclesiastical com- 
 mittee to try a religious order, but I propose to look into 
 the antecedents and character of this order, in order to see 
 whether I believe that their establishment in Canada would 
 be detrimental to the political interests of this country. I 
 propose to examine the question in its political bearing, and 
 in its political bearing alone. Now, Sir, this order had 
 been in existence for nearly 250 years, when it was sup- 
 pressed by the authority to which it professed to owe 
 allegiance. I suppose the Pope was infallible then, and if 
 Pope Clement XIV was infallible, ana if he suppressed the 
 order of the Jesuits he probably had good reasons fordoing 
 so, and I think he had. I do not propose to call into 
 question his infallibility. I do not propose to look into the 
 question of the nropriety of the step he took in dissolving 
 that order, but i do propose to ask the attention of this 
 House to some portions of the celebrated brief which Pope 
 Clement XIV issued, and by which this order was dis- 
 banded. After declaring in his brief the purposes for which 
 the order was instituted, and the various privileges granted 
 by Paul III, and subsequent Popes, the brief of suppression 
 goes on to say : 
 
 " Notwithgtanding bo many and so o^reat favors, it appears from the 
 Apostolical OonstitutioQS th&t almost at the very momoat of its instita- 
 
10 
 
 tion there aroBe ia the bosom of this society, divers seeda of discord and 
 diSsentioQ, not only amoQ(^ the companions themselves, but with other 
 irregular orders, the secular clergy, the academies, the universities, the 
 public schools, and lastly, even with the princes of the states in vrhich 
 the society was received. These dissensions and disputes arose some- 
 times concerning the- nature of their views, the time of admission to 
 them, the power of expulsion, the right of admission to holy orders 
 without a title, and without having taken the solemn vows, contrary to 
 the tenor of the decrees of the Council of Trent, and of Pics V, our pre- 
 decessor ; sometimes concerning the absolute authority assumed by the 
 General of the said order, and about matters relating to the good gov- 
 ernment and discipline of the order ; sometimes concerning different 
 points of doctrine, concerning their schools, or concerning such of their 
 exemption privileges, as the ordinaries and other ecclesiastical or civil 
 officers declared to be contrary to their rights and jurisdictions. In 
 short, accusations of the gravest nature, and very detrimental to the 
 peace and tranquility of a Christian commonwealth have been continu- 
 ally brought against the said order. Hence arose that infinity of ap- 
 f)ealg and protests against this society, which so many sovereigns have 
 aid at the foot of thp Throne of our predecessors, Paul IV. Pius V, and 
 Sixtus V. • • * 
 
 " After so many storms, troubles and divisions, every good maa look- 
 ed forward with impatience to the happy day which was to restore 
 peace and tranquility. But under the reign of this same Clement XIII, the 
 times became more full of difficulty and storm ; complaints and quarrels 
 were multiplied on every side ; in some places dangerous seditions arose, 
 tumults, discords, scandals, which, weakening or entirely breaking the 
 bounds c" Christian charity, excited the faithful to all the rage of party 
 hatred and enmities. Desolation and danger grew to such a height, tknt the 
 very aovereigns, whose piety and liberality towards the society wece so 
 well known as to be looked upon as hereditary in their families— we 
 mean our dearly beloved sons in Christ, the Kings of France, Spain, 
 Portugal and Sicily — found themselves reduced to the necessity of ex- 
 pelling, and .riving from their states, kingdoms, and provinces, these 
 very companions of Jesus ; persuaded that there remained no other 
 remedy to so great evils ; and, that this step was necessary, in order to 
 prevent Christiana from rising one against another, and from massa- 
 creing each other in the very bosom of our common .mother, the Holy 
 Ohuroh. They said, our dear sons in Jesus Christ havmg since consid- 
 ered, that even this remedy was not sufficient for reconciling the whole 
 Christian world, unless that society was absolutely abolished and sup- 
 pressed, made knon n their demands and wishes in this matter to our 
 said predecessor, Clement XIII. They united their common prayers 
 and authority, to obtain that this last method might be put in practice, 
 as the only one capable of assuring the constant repose of their subjects, 
 and the good of the Catholic Church in general. But the unexpected 
 death of the aforesaid Pontiff, rendered this project abortive. 
 
 " As soon as by the Divine mercy and Providentse we were raised to 
 the chair of St. Peter, the same prayers, demands, and wishes were laid 
 before us, and strengthened by the pressing solicitations of many 
 bishops, and other persons of distinguished rank, learning, and piety. 
 But, that we might choose the wisest conrse in a matter of so much 
 moment we determined not to be so precipitate, but to take due time ; 
 not only to examine attentively, weigh carefully, and take counsel 
 wisely, but also by unceasing prayers to ask of the Farther of lights 
 His particular assistance ; exhorting the faithful to co-operate with us 
 by their prayers and good works in obtaining this needful succor." 
 
 After remarking on what the Council of Trent had de- 
 cided, with respect to the clergy who were members of this 
 society, the brief proceeds : 
 
• 11 
 
 •' Actuated oy so many and important considerationa, and, as we hope, 
 aided by the presence and inspiration of the Holy Spirit; comp'-lled also 
 by the necessity of our office, which strictly obliges us to conciliate, 
 maintain and confirm the peace and tranquility of the Christian Com- 
 monwealth, and remove evf^ry obstacle which may tend to trouble it; 
 having further considered that the said Society of Jesus can no longer 
 produce these abundant fruits and those great advantages, with a view 
 to which it was instituted, approved by so many of our predecessors, 
 and enciowofl with so many and extensive privileges : that, on the con- 
 trary, it was difficult, or to say impossible, that the church could re- 
 cover a firm and lasting peace bo long as the said society subsisted; 
 in consequence hereof, and determined by the particular reasons we have 
 alleged, and forced by other motives which prudence and the good 
 government of the cnurch have dictated it, the knowledge of which 
 we keep to ourselves, conforming ourselves to the example of our 
 
 Sredecessors, and particularly to that of Gregory X, in the General 
 ouncil of Lyons; the rather as in the present case we are 
 determining upon the fate of a society cbissed among the mendicant 
 orders, both ite constitution and privileges ; after a mature deliberation, 
 we do, out of our certain knowledge and the fulness of our apostolical 
 power, suppress and abolieh the said society ; we deprive it of all power 
 of action whatever, of its houses, schools, colleges, hospitals, lands, and 
 in short, every other place whatever, in whatever kingdom or Province 
 they may be situated ; we abrogato and annul its statutes, rules, 
 customs, decrees and constitutions, even though confirmed by oath and 
 approved by the Holy See, or otherwise ; in like manner we annul all 
 and every its privileges, favors general or particular, the tenor whereof 
 is, and is taken to be as fully and as amply expressed in this present 
 brief, as if the same were inserted, word for wor^, in whatever clauses, 
 form or decree, or under whatever sanction, their privileges may have 
 been conceived. We declare every authority of all kinds, the »Jeneral, 
 the Provincials, and Visitors and other superiors of the said society, to 
 be forever annulled and extinguished, of what nature soeve.' the said 
 authority may be, whether relating to things spiritual or temporal." 
 
 This, Sir, is a portion of the brief of Pope Clement XIY 
 suppressing this order. Now, Sir, 1 want to enquire whether 
 it will be atseerted that His Holiness the Pope of Kome, in 
 thu?* suppressing this order, and in using the language he 
 did with regard to it, was acting in ignorance — whether in 
 his inlallibility he was mistaken as to the character of this 
 order. 
 
 Some hon. MEMBERS. Oh. 
 
 Mr. CHARLTON. Well, I am not very well posted as 
 to the tenets of the church, if the Pope is not held to be 
 infallible there is a popular misapprehension upon that 
 point. If any one in this House wishes to cast discredit 
 on his judgment or on the motives which actuated him in 
 issuing this brief, I have nothing to say ; but I believe the 
 Pope, in suppressing this order, acted from reason and 
 knowledge in saying what he did in this brief, and that, in 
 issuing it, he acted in accordance with the desire of every 
 king and every statesman in Europe. Th^is order has 
 been arraigned at the bar of history, and has been con- 
 demned ; 1 believe it deserved suppression ; and I be- 
 
12 
 
 lieve that Pope Clemont XIV. acting at the solicita- 
 tion of the various kings of Europe, eupprcMseJ it for 
 good and sufficient reasons. Now, m}' hon. friend from 
 Lincoln (Mr. Eykorl), the other night, read an extract from 
 Macaulay regarding this order, and, as in the case of a good 
 many other extracts, stopped just where ho should have 
 gone on. I will take up the thread of tbo hon. gentleman's 
 discourNC, and proceed trom where he left ofif. At that point 
 Lord Macau lay proceeded to say: 
 
 " But with the admirable energy, disintereatednesa, ana self devotion, 
 which were characteristic of the aociety, j^reat vices were mingled. It 
 wa8 alleged, aci not without foundation, that the ardent public epirit, 
 which made the Jesuit regardless of his ease, of his liberty and of hia 
 life, made him also regardless of truth and of mercy ; that no means 
 which could promote the interest nf his religion seemed to him unlawful, 
 and that by the interest of his religion he too often meant the interest 
 of his society. It was alleged that, in the most atrocious plots recorded 
 in history, his agency could be distinctly traced ; that, constant only in 
 attachment to the fraternity to which he belonged, he was in some 
 countries the most dangerous enemy of freedom, and in others the most 
 dangerous enemy of order. The mighty victories which he boasted 
 that he had achieved in the cause of the church were, in the judgment 
 of many illustrious members of that church, rather apparent ihau real. 
 He had indeed labored with a wonderful show of success to reduce the 
 world under her laws; but he had done so by relaxing her laws 
 to suit the temper oi' the world. Instead of toiling to elevate 
 human nature to the loble standard fixed by Divine precept and 
 example, he bad lowered the standard till it was beneath the 
 average level of human nature. He gloried la multitude of converts 
 who had been baptised in the remote regions of the East ; but it was 
 reported that from some of those converts, the facts on which the whole 
 theology of the Gospel depends had been cunningly cjnoealed, and that 
 others were permitted to avoid persecution by bowing down before the 
 images of false gods, while internally repeating paters and aves. Nor 
 was it only in heathen countries that such arts were said to be prac- 
 ticed. It was not strange ttat people of all ranks, and ei;pecially of the 
 highest ranks, crowded to tie confessionals in the Jesuit temples ; for 
 from these confessionals none went discontented awtiy. Ther? the 
 priest was all things to all men. He showed just so much rigor aa 
 might not drive those who knelt at his spiritual tribunal to the iJomini- 
 caa or the Franciscan Oburcb. If he bad to deal with a mmd trulv 
 devout, he spoke in the saintly tones of the primitive Fathers ; but with 
 that very large part o*^ mankind who have religion enough to make 
 them nneaty when t> y do wrong, and not religion enough lo keep 
 them from doing wrong, he followed a very different system. Siace he 
 could not reclaim them fiom guilt, it was his business to save them 
 from remorse. He had fiX his command an immenae dispensary of 
 anodynes for wounded consciences In the booiis of casuistry which 
 had been written by h's brethren, and printed with the apprubatioa 
 of his superiors, were t'j be found doctrines consolatory to transgressors 
 of every class. There the bankrupt was taught how he might, without 
 sin, secrete his good^ from his creditors. The servant was taught how 
 he might, without ijin, run off with his master's plate The p%n<ier was 
 assured that a Ohrisiian man might innocently earn his living by carry- 
 ing letters and messages between married women and their gallants. 
 The bigh-spir.ted and punctilious gentlemen of t- ranee were gratified by 
 a decision ia favor of duelling. The Italians, accustomed to darker and 
 baser modes of vengeance, were glad to learn that they might, witboot 
 
13 
 
 any critre, shoot at their enemies from behind hedges. To deceit was 
 given & license sufficient to destroy the whole value of human contracts 
 and of numan testimony. In truth, if society continued to hold together, 
 if life and property enjoyed any security, it was because common sense 
 and common humar'iy restrained men from doing what the Society of 
 Jqbup assured them ihat they might with a safe conscience do, so 
 stracv^ely were good and evil intermixed in the character of these cele- 
 brated brethren ; and the intermixture wa« the secret of their gigantic 
 power. Th.it power could never have belonged to mere hypocrites. It 
 could never have belonged to rigid moralists. It was to be'attained only 
 by men sincerely enthusiastic in the pursuit of a great end, and, at the 
 same time, unscrupulous as to the choice of means." 
 
 Now, Sir, I spoke of this order haviog been banished from 
 various coantries. It was banished from England in 1579, 
 again in 15:il, again in 1586, again in 1601, again in 1604, 
 and again in 1191 ; and, Sir. in view of tiie character of 
 British legislation with regard to the Society of Jesuits, 
 ils existence and its presence in any part of the British 
 realm is a contempt of law. By the Catholic Emanci- 
 pation Act, 10 George IV, chapter 7, certain political dis- 
 abilities were removed from the Catholics of Great Britain, 
 The Act recites the oath which Catholics were required to 
 take before being invested- with the rights of citizeni^hip 
 and the right to hold office ; and this Act of 182d, which is 
 not an obsolete law, but a law still in force, which is a law 
 paramount over all colonial laws, contains an enactment 
 with regard to the Jesuits ; and I shall take the liberty of 
 reading sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 33 and 34. I shall read 
 them because they have an important bearing upon the 
 case under discussion, because these articles, of this Eman 
 cipation Act, clearly prove that the incorporation of *he 
 Society ol Jesuits is an unconstitutional Act in this couL.ry 
 or in any other part of the British realm : 
 
 " Section 28. And whereas Jesuits and members of other religious 
 orders, communities or societies ot the Church of Rome bound by 
 mom. Stic or religious vows, are resident within tie United Kingdom, 
 and it is expedient to make provision for the gradual suppression and 
 final prohibition of the same, therein, therefore be it enacted ihat every 
 Jesuit and every member of any other religious order, community, or 
 society of the Ohurch of Rome, bound by monastic or religious vuws, 
 who, at the time of the commencement of this Act shall be within the 
 United Kingdom shall, within six calendar montbs after the commence- 
 ment of this Act, deliver to the clerk of peace of the county or place 
 where such person shall reside or to his deputy, a notice or statement 
 in the form and containing the particulars required to be set forth in the 
 schedule to this Act annexed ; which notice or statement such clerk 
 of the peace, or his deputy, shall preserve and register amongst the 
 records of sueh county or place without any fee, aad shall forthwith 
 transmit a copy of such notice or statement to the Ohief Secretary of 
 the Lord Lieutenant or other Ohief Governor or Governors of Ireland, 
 if such person shall reside in Ireland, or if, in Great Britain, to one of 
 His Majesty's Principrl Secretaries of State, and in case any person 
 shall offend in the premises, he shall forfeit and pay to His Majesty, for 
 every caleadar month during which he shall remain in ttie United 
 
14 
 
 Kingdom, vithoat having delivered each Qotice or statement as ia 
 hereinbefore required, the sum ot fifty pounda. 
 
 " Section 29. And be it further enacted, that if any Jesuit, or member 
 of any Bu^-h religious order, community or society aa aforesaid, shall, 
 after the commeucement of this Act, come into thia roalmi be shall be 
 deemed and taken to be guilty of a misdemeanor and '. einj,- thereof law- 
 fully convicted shall be sentenced and ordered to be baniaied from the 
 United Kingdom for the term of his natural life. 
 
 '' Section 30. Provided always, and be it further enacted, tha* in case 
 any natural born subject of this realm, being at the time of the com- 
 mencement of this Act a Jesuit, or other member of any such religious 
 order, community or society as aforesaid, shall, at the time of the com- 
 mencement of this Act be out of the realm, it shall be lawful tor such 
 person to return or come into this realm ; and upon his return or coining 
 into the realm, he is heieby required, within the space of ^ix calendar 
 months, to deliver such notice or statement to the clerk of the peace of 
 the county or place where he shall reside, or his deputj, for the purpose 
 of being so registered and trausmitted, aa hereinbefore directed ; and in 
 case any such person shall neglect or refuse so to do, he shall for such 
 offence forfeit and pay to His Majesty for every calendar month during 
 which he shall remain in the United Ningdom without having delivered 
 such notice or statement, the sum of fifty pounds. 
 
 " Section 31. Provided also, and i it further enacted, that not- 
 withstanding anything hereinbefore contained, it shall be lawful for 
 any one of flis Majesty's Principal eiecietaries of State, being a Protestant, 
 by a license in writing, signed by him, to grant permission to any 
 Jesuit or member of any such religious order, community, or society aa 
 aforesaid, to come into the United Kngdom, and to remain th rein for 
 such period as the said Secretary of State shall think proper, not exceed- 
 ing in any case, the space of six calendar months, and it shall also be law- 
 ful for any one of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries ot State to revoke any 
 licence granted before the expiration of the time mentionad therein, if 
 he shall so think fit ; and if any such person to v hom such license shall 
 have been granted shall not depart from the United Kingdom within 
 twenty days after the expiration of the time mentioned in such 
 license, or if such license shall have been revoked, then within twenty 
 days after notice of such revocation shall have been given to him, every 
 person so offending shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and being 
 thereof lawfully convicted, ahall be sentenced and ordered to be banished 
 from the Unite'd Kingdom for the term of his natural life. 
 
 ''Section 33. And be it further enacted that, in case any Jesuit, or 
 member of any such religious order, community or society, as aforesaid, 
 shall, after the commencement of this Act, within any part of the 
 United Kingdom, admit any person to become a reeular ecclesiastic, or 
 brother, or member of any such religious order, community, or society, 
 or be aiding or consenting thereto, or shall administer, or cause to be 
 administered, or be aiding or assisting in the administering or taking 
 any oath, vow, or engagement, purporting, or intended to bind the 
 person taking the same to the rules, ordinances, or ceremonies of such 
 religious order, community, or society, every person offending in the 
 premises, in England, or Ireland, shall be deemed guilty of a misde- 
 meanor, and in Scotland shall be punished by fine and imprioonment. 
 
 "Section 34. And be it further enacted that, in case any person thall, 
 after the commencement of this Act, within any part of this United 
 Kingdom, be udmitted, or become a Jesuit, or brother, or member of 
 any other such religious order, community, or society, as aforesaid, such 
 person shall be deemed and taken to be guilty oi a misdemeanor, and 
 beingthereof lawfully convicted, shall be sentenced and ordered to be 
 banished from the United Kingdom for the term of his natural life." 
 
 Now, that is the statute which imposes penalties and a fine 
 upon any foreigner who is a Jesuit tor coming into the 
 
15 
 
 
 I 
 
 United Kingdom, and which impoHOS penalties and a fino 
 upon any person who induots a person into the order, and 
 upon any person who becomes a member of the order. 
 That i« taken from the Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829. 
 Now, I am unable to see, in the fnco of the provisions of 
 that Act, how the incorporation of this order can be legal 
 or constitutional either in Canada or in any other part of 
 Her Majesty's realm. This case was referred to, some years , 
 ago, in a debate in the Houst of Commons. Mr. Disraeli 
 who was then the First Minister of the Cvown, stated, on 
 the lOlh of July, 1875, that : 
 
 " Although DO proceeiinga had beea taken against the Jesuits under 
 the Act of 1829, he bef^gei it to be nnderatood tb»t the provisions under 
 the Act are not obsolete, but on the contrarj are reserving powers of the 
 law of which the government will be prepared to avail theoiselves if 
 neceeaary." 
 
 And Mr. Gladstone, who was asked his opinion upon this 
 matter, as to ihe legality of the residence of the Jesuits in 
 England, referred his correspondents to this Act of Parlia- 
 ment, the provisions of which with regard to the Jesuits I 
 have road. And the Law Journal of England, which con- 
 tains an account ol this matter, then adds : 
 
 " This Act, while it carried out the well known reform commemorated 
 by its name, imposes restrictions on 'Jesuits and members of other 
 religious orders, communities or societies of the Church of Rome bound 
 by monastic or religious vows,' of which it recites it is 'expedient to 
 provide for the gradual suppression and final prohibition.' Any of 
 these persons, not including nuns, coming into the realm withoat a 
 license which can last only six months, are, by section 29, declared 
 guilty of a misdemeanor and may be sentenced to be banished for lite. 
 iSimilarly, any persons admitted within the kingdom to membership in 
 any of the orders in questioa may, by section 34, be sentenced to banish- 
 ment for life. If, although banished they do not go out of the country, 
 the {Sovereign in Council may have them conveyed to some place abroad. 
 Moreover, if they are found in the country at the end of three months 
 they may be convicted o.gain and transported. Penal servitude is now 
 substituted for transportation. Will this law be now enforced ? Or 
 will a charitable reserve be shown, entailing, as it naturally will do, 
 further lawlessness " 
 
 Now, the treaty ceding Canada in 1763, provided for the 
 freedom of the Catholic religion in this country, so far as 
 the laws of Great Britain permitted the exercise of that 
 religion, and the Act 14 George III, chapter 83, provided 
 that the French Catholics in this country may exercise the 
 religion of the Church of Eome subject to the King's sup- 
 remacy. The right to exercise this provision is thus 
 subject to the provisions of the law, and one of the provi- 
 sions of that law I have called the attention of the House 
 to with regard to the Jesuit organisation, contained in the 
 Emancipation Act of 182^. It was claimed last night 
 
by the Minister of Justice that, at the time of the Oonqaest, 
 the property of individuals was not forfeited or confiscated. 
 It was cluitned that the property of the Jesuits was not 
 subject to forfeiture or confiscation under the terms of the 
 Treaty of Paris ceding Canada to Great Britain. But I 
 think it must be held that the Jesuit or^^acinaiioa would not 
 be treated upon the basis of individuals, but as a corpor- 
 ,ation, and 1 and that the Act says : 
 
 '' Arid be it further enacted ty the authority aforesaid, that all Hia 
 Majesty's Oanadiaa subjects ' thin the Province of Quebec, the reli- 
 gious orders aud commuaities only excepted " 
 
 Are to have these priv*'oges. So that the religious orders 
 and communities were, by the terms of the cession, ex- 
 pressly excepted from the privileges granted to the inhabi- 
 tants of the I?rovince of Quebec, or the Province of Canada. 
 
 Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). What are you reading from? 
 
 Mr. CHAKLTON. I am reading from 14 George III, 
 chapter 83, the Quebec Act. All the rights possessed by 
 the citizens of the Province of Quebec, or of oid Canada, 
 were rights delegated by the British Crown, rights ex- 
 presely granted, rights clearly defined, and rights, in every 
 case, subordinate to the supremacy of the Crown, and sub- 
 ordinate to the supremacy of Imperial law ; and, if that 
 Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829 contains, as I have 
 shown, express provisions, making it a misdemeanor for a 
 foreign Jesuit to come into England, making it a misde- 
 meanor to induce a British subject into the Jesuit Order, 
 making it a misdemeanor on the part of the person who 
 inducts him and on the part of the person who is inducted, 
 in face of the provisions of that law, I hold that it is 
 simply preposterous to say that the incorporation of the 
 Order of Jesuits in British America, is a constitutional Act. 
 If the incorporation of this order is unconstitutional, it fol- 
 lows, as a matter of course, that all the Acts based upon 
 that incorporation, are unconstitutional. If the incorpora- 
 tion is unconstitutional, the endowment is unconstitutional, 
 and the Jesuits' Estates Act is an unconstitutional Act, if 
 the Incorporation Act is so. 
 
 It has been made by British law, upon more occasions 
 than one, an unconstitutional Act to procure judgments 
 or determinations, &c., from the See of Eome, or any 
 foreign potentate. This legislation was first initiated 
 under Edward III, it was oontinned under Eiohard 11, 
 again under Henry VIII, By 24 Henry VIII, chapter 
 21, penalties are imposed for procuring inhibitions, judg- 
 ments and other processes from the See of Home within the 
 
17 
 
 King's dominioDs — not alone in England, Ireland and 
 Scotland, but in any part of the King'b domin'ons. The 
 24 Honry VII I, chapter 21, prohibits the King, his heirs and 
 Buccessors, kings of the realm, and all subjects of the realir 
 or of the dominions of the Crown, for suing for licenses, 
 dispensations, compositions, faculties, grants, rescripts, 
 delegations, or any other instruments in writing from the 
 Bishop of Kome, called the Pope, or from any person or 
 persons having or pretending to have any authority by the 
 same. " The King, his heirs and successors," being express- 
 ly named in the Act, the reigning sovereign is bound by 
 the prohibition; and il is not within the constitutional 
 power of a Colonial Legislature or Governor to absolve the 
 Crown from its provisions, or to enact or assent to any Bill 
 violating this or any other Imperial statute in force in the 
 colony. The Crown can only be relieved from the prohi- 
 bitions of the Act by the power that imposed them, namely, 
 the Imperial Parliament. And in 13 Elizabeth, '•hapter 
 2, and 1 Elizabeth, chapter 1, it is provided in more oppress 
 terms that : 
 
 "The usurped power and jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, hereto- 
 fore unlawfully claimed and usurped within this realm, and other the 
 dominions to the Queen's Majesty belongmg," 
 
 Shall not be exercised. Neither the Treaty of Surrender, 
 nor the Act of 1774 did more than to grant ihe free exer- 
 cise of the Catholic religion in Canada, so far as the laws of 
 Great Britain permit. But we are told by the Minister of 
 Justice that a Provincial Parliament can repeal Imperial 
 statutes as concerns itself, if I understood him aright. I 
 do not accept this de6 Ition of the law. I do not hold that 
 the thing formed can say to that which formed it : what 
 doest thou ? and can set aside the mandate of the power 
 which formed it. I find in the British North America Act 
 a provision which is antagonistic to the statement of my 
 hon. friend the Minister of Justice. The 129th section of 
 that Act contains the following : — 
 
 " Except as otherwise provided by this Act, all laws in force in 
 Canada, Nova Scotia or New Brunswick at the tlnion, and all courts 
 of civil and criminal jurisdiction, and all legal commissions, powers 
 and authorities, and all officers judicial, administrative and minister- 
 ial, existing therein at the Union, shall continue in Ontario, Quebec, 
 Nova Scotia and New Brunswick respectively, as if the Onion had not 
 been made ; subject, nevertheless (except with respect to such as are 
 enacted by or exist under Acts of the Parliament of Great Britain, or 
 of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland) 
 to be repealed, abolished or altered by the Parliament of Canada; or by 
 the Legislature of the respective Provinces, according to the authority 
 of the Parliament or of that Legislature under this Act.'' 
 
 So that, by this Constitution of British North America, by 
 section 129, special exception is made as to this power in 
 2* 
 
 '«tfc 
 
18 
 
 regard to each Aots as existed by the authority of the 
 Parliament of Great Britain or the Parliament of Great 
 Britain and Ireland^ I have here a case, if it is necessary 
 to quote it, ex parte Eenaud, which bears out this view. 
 The judgment is too long to read unless it is desired, but I 
 can send it to the Minister of Justice if he desires. I have 
 laid down the premises, and I think they cannot be contro- 
 verted, that the recognition of any foreign potentate, 
 prince or ecclesiastical, in any statute enacted within the 
 dominions of the Crown of Great Britain, which recognises 
 that power or its inhibitions, decress or processes, is an 
 unconstitutional act. Now, the Estates Bill which we have 
 under consideration does recognise His Holiness the Pope 
 as a potentate. It treats with that potentate as to the 
 terms of the settlement of a oomestic matter in a Province 
 of this Dominion. The Bill is passed subject to the ap* 
 proval of that potentate, as is shown by the language in this 
 return of correspondence in coanection with this matter. 
 I find in the letter of Mr. Mercier to Father Turgcon, dated 
 the 1st May, 18vS8, in the seventh paragraph, the following 
 language used : — 
 
 " That any agreement made between jou and the Ooverument of the 
 Province will be binding only in so far as it shall Le ratified by the Pope 
 and the Legislature of this Province.' ' 
 
 " By the Pope and Legislature of this Province ". Sir, the 
 Legislature not only passes a Bill subject to the Pope's 
 approval, but this Act places public money at the disposal 
 ot His Holiness the Pope, as is shown in the same letter, in 
 paragraph 8, which reads as follows : — 
 
 " That the amount of the compensation fixed shall remain in posaee- 
 sion of the Qovernment of the Province as a special deposit until the 
 Pope has ratified said settlement, and made known his wishes respecting 
 the distribution of such amount in this country." 
 
 Now, Sir, the hon. member for Stanstead (Mr. Colby) 
 told us the other night that this provision was a very bitter 
 pill for the Protestants of Quebec. I do not wonder that is 
 the case. A pill that treats with His Holiness as to the 
 terms of a domestic matter, that passes a Bill subject to the 
 approval of His Holiness, that places public money at the 
 disposal of His Holiness, must have been a bitter pill, as 
 the hon. gentleman expressed it, for the Protestants of 
 Quebec to swallow. But not only is the Bill open to these 
 objections, but it distinctly submits the legislation of the 
 Province of Quebec to the ratification of the Pope, as is 
 shown by this return on page 13 : 
 
 " It is also one way of commemorating, in the political history of the 
 country, that glorious concordat, the effecting whereof would be 
 associated with the name of your Government, as soon as the Holy 
 Father has ratified it ; that is, that the establishments of the Jesuit 
 
19 
 
 Fathers in this Province are always allowed, in accordance with their 
 deserts, and if they ask for it, to participate in the grants which the 
 Ooyernment of this Province allows to other institutions to encourage 
 teaching, education, indostries, arts and colonisation." 
 
 Now, Mr. Speaker, any law which is open to these objec- 
 tions, any law which calls in a foreign potentate to dictate 
 with reference of the settlement of a domestic matter, wnich 
 places moneys at his disposal, which submits legislation to 
 his ratification, leaving him to accept or reject it — any Bill, 
 I say, subject to these conditions, liable to these objections, 
 is a Bill which, under the law I have quoted bearing upon 
 the question of the Queen's supremacy in the British realms, 
 is clearly unconstitutional and clearly contrary to the 
 spirit and to the letter of the English law. The Minister of 
 Justice told us last night that the only objections to this 
 Bill were contained in the preamble. He did not deny that 
 there were some objectionable features in the preamble 
 of this Bill, but the preamble, he said, was not really a 
 portion of the Bill, and consequently the Bill was not subject 
 to that objection. But I find, Sir, that the Bill itself refers 
 to this preamble, and if the hon. gentleman will turn to 
 sections 1 and 2 of that Bill, he will find that those sections 
 read as follows : — 
 
 " 1. The aforesaid arrangements entered into between the Premier and 
 the Reverend Father Turgeon are hereby ratified, and the Lientenant 
 Governor in Council is authorised to carry them out according to their 
 forms and tenor." 
 
 Section 2 says : 
 
 " 2. The Lieutenant Qovernor in Qouncil is authorised to pay out of 
 any public moneys at his disposal, the sum of $400,000 in the manner 
 and under the conditions mentioned in the documents above cited, and 
 to make any deeds that he may deem necessary fur the full and entire 
 execution of such agreement.'' 
 
 So the objectionable features contained in the preamble are 
 embodied in the Bill, specially referred to in the Bill, con- 
 firmed in the Bill, and form in point of fact a portion of the 
 Bill itself. Now, Mr. Speaker, it is asserted by Mr. Mercier, 
 it is admitted, I believe, by my hon. friend the Minister of 
 Justice, it is not disputed, so far as I am aware, by anyone, 
 that the Jesuits had no legal right to these estates. My hon. 
 friend the member for Both well sought to break the force 
 of the arguments with reference to the want of any legal 
 claim on the part of the Jesuit Society, sought to break 
 the force of the payment of money to the order of 
 the Pope, by referring to the Clergy Reserve case, by 
 speaking of the commutation of the Clergy Reserves havvng 
 been paid by the Government of Canada to certain 
 ecclesiastical bodies. Well, Sir, the cases are not 
 parallel. No claim was set up in that instance that 
 
20 
 
 these eoolesiastical bodies had not a legal claim. 
 Od the contrary that claim waa admitted, there was a com- 
 mutation of this claim, and the money was paid to them 
 under that commutation. But that is not a parallel cluim 
 to this present case, where there was no legal claim, v^here 
 no legal demand could possibly be made on the part of the 
 Jesuit organisation for the pay mem of money. No^, I 
 have referred before to the fact of these estates being the 
 property of the Crown. I have referred to the Act of 1774, 
 which specially exempted the ecclesiastical corporations 
 from participation in the rights and annuities that per- 
 tained to individuals, and the property of the corpo- 
 rations was undoubtedly the property of the Crown. 
 Foreign corporations could not hold property in Canada; 
 they could not hold property then, they could not hold 
 property in Canada till a very recent period. The fact 
 that this was a religious order that had been endowed with 
 its lands by the King of Franco, places this corporation in 
 such a position ihat its rightH were forfeited when the con- 
 quest took place, and the forfeiture was completed when 
 the order was expelled. We have an instance recorded, a 
 case brought to trial within recent years, where it was 
 decided that a foreign corporation could not hold property 
 in the Province of Quebec except by virtue of special legis- 
 lative action, the case of the Chaudiere Gold Mining Co. vs. 
 George Desbarats which was before the Privy Council in 
 1873. It was held: 
 
 "That, by the law of the Province of Quebec, corporations are under 
 a distbilitj to acquire lands without the permission of the Grown or the 
 authority of the legislature, that a foreign corporation could not pur- 
 chase lands in said Province without such permission or authority, and 
 had no action for damages against the vendor." 
 
 There can be no question about the loss of title by the Jesuit 
 Order. In 1841, when this property was dealt with, it was 
 the property of the Crown, and there can be no doubt that 
 between 1841 and 1867, when the Provinces entered into 
 Confederation, this particular property was appropriated to 
 the schools of the Province of Quebec, and there can be no 
 doubt that this property having been appropriated to the 
 school funds of the Province, it was unconstitutional to 
 divert it to other sources and use it for other purposes. 
 
 Now, there is another objection to this settlement which 
 leads me to believe that it cannot be a final settlement. 
 Other demands may be made. Subsequent events may 
 chow that the lands were sold for more than was anticipated. 
 The Jesuits may fall back on the estimation of the value 
 made at one time which was about 8400,000, and may 
 claim more if the property sells for more. The cor- 
 respondence, if carefully scrutinised, will lead one to the 
 
21 
 
 oonclaBion that wo aro not by any means in a poaition 
 whoro wo can be Bnro that this oaso is finally closed. Thero 
 is one piece of property which is considered as part of tho 
 Jesuits' estates, the Champ do Mars, whioh is Domiuio? 
 property. There is Laprairio Common, which has boon 
 passed over to tho Jesuits but held to be Dominion property. 
 It has been occupied by the Dominion Government as a 
 parade ground for many years, and they have the right of 
 possession at least. I assert my belief that the common of 
 Laprairio is Dominion property, which has been granted 
 to the Order of the Jes' \s by the Province of Quebec. 
 Tho correspondence with ^. rd to this matter, if it is 
 carefully scrutinized, will b... us to the opinion that it is 
 far from being settled. I and in the letter from tho Pre- 
 mier of Quebec to Father Turgeon, dated Ist May, tho 
 following clause : — 
 
 "That you will grant to the Government of the Province of Quebec 
 in full, complete and perpetual concessioa of all the property which may 
 have belonged in Canada, under whatever title, to the f^therB of the 
 old society, and that you will renounce to all righta generally 
 whatsoever upon Buch property and the revenues therefrom in 
 favor of our Province, the whole, aa well in the name of the old Order 
 of Jesuits, and of your present corporation as in the name of the Pope, 
 of the Sacred Oollege of the Propaganda and of the Roman Catholic 
 
 Rev. Father replied on 8th of Mayas 
 
 Church in general 
 
 To this letter the 
 follows : — 
 
 " The Government of the Province of Quebec will receive a full, 
 complete and perpetual concession of all the property which may have 
 bolon^'cd in Canada, by whatever title, to th« fathers of the old society, 
 and the Jesuit fathers will renounce all rights generally whatsoever 
 upon sucn property and the revenues therefrom ialavorof tho Proriace, 
 the whole, ixi the name of the Pope, of the Sacred College of the Propa- 
 ganda and of the Roman Catholic Church in general." 
 
 What does that amount to ? Tho Society of Jesus gives a 
 quit claim for all its property to the Province of Quebec. 
 Part of that property, the Champ do Mars, valued at 81,024,- 
 000 is tho property of the Dominion ; and we shall have in 
 due time, perhaps, Mr. Mercier coming to Ottawa with a 
 demand for the settlement of his claim against tho Dominion 
 Government for tho value of tho Champ de Mars because of 
 this transaction, and because a quit claim was given by 
 His Holiness tho Pope in behalf of tho Jesuits. If the ar- 
 gument of the Minister of Justice is correct, if the Jesuits 
 have a title to this property that claim would be good ; and 
 if this Bill becomes law we are exposing ourselves to the pos- 
 sible contingency of having the Province of Quebec make a 
 claim on the Dominion for the value of that portion of tho 
 Jesuits' estates known as the Champ de Mars. And then wo 
 have the other possibility of the Society of Josus coming to 
 
2S 
 
 I 
 
 the Dominion and demanding the value of the L^prairie 
 Common, which has been granted it by the Province of Que- 
 bec, but which is probably the actual property of the Domin- 
 ion of Canada. We are leaving ourselves open to further de- 
 mands with respect to this matter ; and I believe for this 
 consideration, if there were no others, it would be proper 
 and prudent to disallow this Bill. The other objection I 
 have to this Bill is, that I hold it to be in the highest 
 degree dangerous and improper to make grants to religious 
 bodies. If you once open the door, if once you permit that 
 species of operation to be commenced in this country, there 
 is no human wisdom that cin tell where it eventually will 
 end. Can any one believe that this grant made to the 
 Society of the Jesuits by the Province of Quebec has no 
 connection whatever with political exigencies ? Can any- 
 one doubt that seeking political influence ha;^ something to 
 do with this ^, matter, and if it has been the motive in one 
 case, may it not be the motive in another ? Are we not 
 opening the door to great evils that will bo introduced if 
 we permit this sort of influence to be inaugurated, if we 
 permit an arrangement made between the Premier of the 
 Province of Quebec and the Society of Jesus, by which 
 the Jesuits are endowed with 8400,000 upon a most 
 doubtful claim — what may be the next thing ? I believe 
 upon the ground that this Bill paves the way to farther de- 
 mands for religious grants that may be successfully pressed 
 when votes and influence are badly needed by some political 
 party that it endangers the interests of this country, and for 
 this, if for no other reason, this Act should be disallowed. 
 
 I have now concluded with the constitutional aspect 
 oi' this case. I hold that the incorporation of the Society of 
 Jesus is unconstitutional because the existence of that so- 
 ciety is prohibited by English law. In England the Jesuits' 
 society is an illegal body ; the initiation into the Society 
 of Jesus of a member is illegal, it is illegal on the part of 
 tho man who does it, and it is illegal for the one initiated. 
 They .are under pains and penalties, it ie an unconstitutional 
 society, it is under the ban of English law ; and that being 
 the case, it is not an order that can be constitutionally 
 incorporated in any part of the British realm. Then I 
 hold that the Jesuits' Estates Act, being predicated upon, 
 that Act, is itself neocBsarily unconstitutional. It is 
 unconstitutional further in the fact that it calls in a foreign 
 potentate, recognises him, places money at his disposal, 
 places a piece of legislation at his disposal to ratify or to set 
 aside, and in that respect it is clear that it is in contraven- 
 tion of British law and British supremacy. For these rea- 
 sons I hold that the measure is clearly unconstitutional, 
 
23 
 
 I 
 
 and as such should be without delay disallowed by the 
 Government of this Dominion. 
 
 Bat even if it was constitutional, even if the whole 
 argument I have constructed so far was baseless and 
 was swept away, and if this measure was shown to 
 be constitutional, constitutional as regards the Bill, con- 
 stitutional in being founded on a constitutional Act, 
 permitting the incorporation of the Society of Jesus, 
 yet I hold that, as a question of public policy, the measure 
 should be disallowed. The posit'on which the Liberals of 
 this country occupy in this case is briefly this : They take 
 high ground in defence of provincial rights ; thoy take 
 high ground upon the question of the Dominion Govern- 
 meet interfering with provincial legislation. And I sup- 
 pose, with their views upon this case, with their record, 
 even though they did not approve of this Bill, even if they 
 cocsidered it was an improper Bill, they would not counsel 
 and support the proposition to disallo^^ the Bill, on the 
 ground that it was interfering with provincial rights. But 
 whether it is desirable that the Government should be de- 
 barred from the exercise of the prerogative of this disallow- 
 ance, is an abstract question ; whether it w '" Id be a good thing 
 to reconstruct our constitution and to bar the Government 
 from the exercise of that privilege or not, I do not venture 
 to say, but I do say that the right exists and is clearly con- 
 ferred on the Government. And further, the right has been 
 repeatedly 3xercised. The hon. member for Bothwell (Mr. 
 Mills), in the course of Lis argument said that the preroga- 
 tive of disallowance was not essential to the maintenance 
 of our constitution, and he said that in the United States 
 no such prerogative of disallowan ce was permitted on the 
 part of the Central Government, that the remedy there lay 
 in an appeal to the Supreme .Court of the United States. 
 That is perfectly true. But the hon, gentleman is aware 
 that there is a vast difference between the structure of the 
 Dominion constitution and that of the United States. The 
 principle of the United States Government 1 relieve is that 
 the State is sovereign, within its own proper sphere, and all 
 the powers exercised by the Government of the United 
 States are powers delegated by the States, which in their 
 individual capacity as States ratified the original consti- 
 tution, and must ratify all amendments to the same, and 
 every power not thus specially delegated to the Central 
 Government by the constitution is reserved to the States. 
 What is the case in thrj Dominion of Canada? All powers 
 not specially granted to the several Provinces by the 
 British North American Act are reserved to the Dominion 
 and any Act passed by a Provincial Legislature may be 
 
24 
 
 disallowed by the t*nvy Council. That is the differenoe 
 between the two. We had in this country a Legislative 
 Union and we parted with that and entered into Con- 
 federation, and whether it was wise or whether it was 
 unwise to invest the Government at Ottawa wi' ae 
 power of disallowance or not, this Government c .^ .^- 
 ercise the power, it has exercised the power, and it has in 
 repeated instances put that power into operation. It has 
 done it in the case of railway le(];islation in Manitoba, and 
 it has done it in the case of the fcltreams Biil, and numerous 
 other cases. I am willing to admit that this power should 
 be exercised with the utmost caution ; I am willing to admit 
 that the plainei^t and most palpable reasons should exist for 
 the exercise of this power, but 1 am ready to assert, Sir, that 
 there has never been a case in thie history of the Dominion 
 of Canada where, upon broad constitutional grounds, and 
 having due regard to the general interests of the great 
 mass of the people of this country, it was more proper 
 to disallow a Bill, than in this particular instance ; 
 and that the settlement of the Jesuits' Estates Act was, 
 above ail other measures that have ever come under the 
 cognisance of this Government, a measure that should be 
 disallowed. My hon. fiiend the member for Both well 
 (Mr. Mills) ^ays that there are two classes of cases 
 where disallowance is warrantable, and one is the case 
 where the Bill is clearly unconstitutional. This is a case of 
 that kind ; this Bill is clearly unconstitutional in my opin- 
 ion. He says the other case is where a Bill is not in the 
 interest of the entire Dominion. Well, this case covers this 
 Bill also. The Biil is clearly unconstitutional and it is 
 clearly not in the interest of the Dominion, and so, by the 
 hon. gentleman's own logic, this Bill should be disallowed. 
 This power of veto is clearly a constitutional power which 
 may be exercised by the Government, which the Government 
 has the right to exercise, which the Government has ex- 
 ercised in former cases, and which, in my opinion, in view 
 of the character of this Bill, and of the probable future con- 
 sequences of allowing this Bill to become law, the Govern- 
 ment ought, upon the highest ground of public interest, to 
 disallow. 
 
 Now, as I said some time ago in considering this question 
 of disallowance, in considering as to whether it is proper to 
 do so or not, the Government were warranted in invet^tigat* 
 ing the character of the Jesuits. I have a list here of the 
 countries from which this order had been expelled before 
 its suppression by Clement XIV". They were expelled 
 from the following countries at the dates mentioned : — 
 
25 
 
 Saragosa ,, 1555 
 
 La Palintiae 1556 
 
 VenicB. i»» ••••••••mi ..••<*1568 
 
 Avigaoa .•> 1570 
 
 Portagal and Segovia 1578 
 
 BnglaDd • •>•••• 1579 
 
 England .. .^ 1581 
 
 fingland - >...• — 1686 
 
 Japan 1587 
 
 Hungary and Trans7lyania...l688 
 
 Bordeaux 1589 
 
 Franc3 1594 
 
 Holland 1596 
 
 Tournon and Berne 1697 
 
 England 1601 
 
 England 1604 
 
 Denmark 1606 
 
 Venice 1612 
 
 Japan 1613 
 
 Bohemia 1618 
 
 The order was restored by Pius VII on 7th August, 1814, 
 aud since that date this selfsame order has been expelled 
 from the following countries : — 
 
 Uoravla ^m 1619 
 
 Naples and Netherlands.. 1622 
 
 Ohina and India 1623 
 
 Malta 1634 
 
 Russia 1723 
 
 Bftvoy 1729 
 
 Paragoav 1733 
 
 xortugai .•••»•••#•••••••••••• la.a.i 17o9 
 
 France 1764 
 
 onain •.«••••• •.••»••• •»••••••• t<ta>« 1767 
 
 the Two Sicilies 1767 
 
 Parma and Malta »...1768 
 
 All Obristendom by the Bull 
 
 of Clement XI 7 
 
 Russia 1776 
 
 France 1804 
 
 Orisons, Swiss Oanton 1804 
 
 Naples 1806 
 
 France i810 
 
 Belgium .^^ ......... 1816 
 
 French towns, 1819 
 
 Russia.... >. 1820 
 
 Colleges inFr^ j 1828 
 
 France 1831 
 
 Portugal 1834 
 
 Spain 1835 
 
 France 1846 
 
 Switzerland 1847 
 
 Naples and Papal States, > 
 Parma, Arch Duchy of Lq^ 
 Austria, Galica, Sardinia, M°**' 
 
 Sicily .....!;. .' 
 
 Paraguay 1858 
 
 Italian towns 1859 
 
 Now, we are told that the character of this order has 
 changed, forsooth ; that it is not the order it was when 
 Clement XIY suppressed it ; that it is not the order it was 
 when nearly all the potentates of Europe agreed in de- 
 manding that it should be suppressed. " Oh, no," they say, 
 ** it is not the same order." How is it, then, that the States 
 I have mentioned have expelled this order since it was re- 
 stored in 1814 ? and be it remembered that fifteen of these 
 States were Catholic States or communities. I think ihut is 
 a significant fact. I doubt very much, whether, in view of 
 that lact the argument can be made successfully, that the 
 character of this order has been changedt What was the 
 opinion of Cardinal Taschereau with regard to this order, 
 when it was proposed to incorporate it two years ago ? 
 What was the opinion of Mr. Gladstone in regard to this 
 order, so late as 1876 ? I find in the Contemporary Review, 
 of June, 1876, that Mr. Gladstone has indicted the princi* 
 pies of which they are the professional exponents on these 
 counts : 
 
 " (1) Its hostility to mental freedom at large : (2) its incompatibility 
 with the thought and movement of modern civilisation ; (3) its preten- 
 sions against the State ; (4) its pretensions against parental and con- 
 jugal tights ; (6) its jealousy, abated in some quarters, of the free 
 circulation and use of the Holy aorioture ; (6) the de Jaeto alieaatioa 
 30 
 
26 
 
 of the educated mind of the country in which it prevails ; (7) its detri- 
 mental effects on the comparative strength and morality of the States in 
 which it has sway ; (8) its tendency to sap veracity in the individual 
 mind. " 
 
 Now, that is an arraignment by Mr. Gladstone of this order, 
 the character of which we are considering to-day. In 187^ 
 a discussion took place upon the character of this order in 
 the French Chamber, and that discussion was referred to 
 by my hon. friend from North Simcoe (Mr. McCarthy) 
 last night. Now, Sir, I do not intend to detain the 
 House with the speech of M. Ferry and M. Bert (since 
 Minister of Education), M. du Bodan, M. Le Frevost 
 and others, but the substance of it amounted to this: 
 that the Minister of Education sent and had examined 
 the character of the Jesuits' text books, and the character of 
 their teachings in their schools ai)d colleges, and the inves- 
 tigation made in regard to the character of that order was 
 such as to satisfy the French Assembly, and the Depart- 
 ment of Education in France, that the Jesuits were an order 
 that ought not to be allowed to have anything whatever to 
 do with education in that republic. Their principles were 
 recognised to be incompatible with the independence of 
 every government. They were proved to hold the same 
 doctrines that they had held during the last 300 years. 
 They taught the Divine right of Kings ; they taught that 
 the liberty of the press wfcs a dangerous thing ; they advo- 
 cated religious wars ; they attacked the Eevolution and glo- 
 rified the Eevocation of the Edict of Nantes ; they calumni- 
 ated Necker and Burgot j they rejected the principles of! 
 national sovereignty ; trial by jury was denounced, and 
 liberty of conscience and worship was condemned. In one 
 of these works, by Charles Barthelemy, the following pas- 
 sage, in the chapter dealing with Protestant people, dis- 
 poses of English morality : — 
 
 " In London and all over England, the holiness of marriage is des- 
 troyed, bigamy is frequent, the wife is not the companion but the slave 
 of her husband ; the coujugal tie is dissolved ; the children are poisoned 
 or sold." 
 
 The subjects treated in Father Humbert's work, published 
 in 1840, '' Instructions chrdtiennes pour les jeunes gens et 
 les jennes fiUes," were lound to be so monstrous and filthy, 
 according to Mr. Bert, that though the work was put into 
 tho hands of youn^ girls — objectionable passages could 
 not be read in the French Assembly with ladies in the 
 gallery. Without detaining the House with the evidence 
 placed before the Legislative Asoembly in France, by 
 the Minister of Education and others, suffice it to say 
 that upon that evidence the Jesuits were expelled from the 
 «daoational institutions of that republic. I think, Sir, I 
 
27 
 
 bed 
 
 I et 
 
 into 
 ould 
 the 
 ■Buce 
 
 by 
 
 say 
 the 
 
 am warranted in saying that we will consult the interests 
 of this country, present and future, if we do not permit to 
 be establiehed in this Dominion that organisation whose 
 whole history is a history of turmoil, oi intrigue, of mischief 
 and of attempts to pull down and destroy constitutional 
 authority wherever they have been placed, Sir, we do not 
 want an organisation in this country that will widen the 
 breach that exists between the two great races in Canada ; 
 we do not want an organisation in this country, the influence 
 exerted by which will be so detrimental to the best interests 
 of this country present and future. 
 
 I have been requested, Mr. Speaker, before closing to read 
 this resolution placed in my hands ; a resolution adopted at 
 a special meeting of the Protectant Ministerial Ast^ociation 
 in Montreal hold this morning, it sajs : 
 
 " At a epecial meeting of the ProteBtunt Ministerial Association of 
 Montreal, held this morning, attention was drawn to certain statements 
 made on the floor of the House of Commons, during the debate on the 
 Jesuits' Estates Act, by the hon. member for Stanstead (0. 0. Oolby), 
 who is reported to have stated that he represents the feelings of the 
 Protestants of Quebec ; that they have made no complaint ; presented 
 no petition and sought no redress from supposed wrongs, that, in fact, 
 the Protestants have no grievances, but are treated with more justice, 
 liberality and generosity than any minority in the world. 
 
 " Therefore be it resolved — 
 
 " That the Ministerial Association repudiate the hon. member's claim 
 to represent thu feelings of the Protestant community of the Province of 
 Quebec. That ii is entirely incorrect to say that no petitions have been 
 presented against the measure in favor of the Jesuits, inasmuch as this 
 Assi elation presented a petition against the incorporation of the Jesuits 
 in 1887, to the Legislature of Quebec, and petitions to the Governor 
 General in Council for the disallowance of the Jesuits' Estates Act, Lave 
 been presented from this Association, from the Rev. the Presbytery of 
 Montreal, from the Dominion Evangelical Alliance, and by some 6,000'* 
 citizens from the city of Montreal and other parts of the Province of 
 Quebec. The matter also engaging the earnest attention of the Evan- 
 gelical Alliance at its Conference in Montreal in October last, and 
 strong resolutions in protest were adopted. 
 
 " And so far frcm having no grievances, the Protestant minority baa 
 serious cause of complaint in relation to many matters, among which 
 the following are specified : The division of taxes for educational pur- 
 poses; the recent unsettling of the foundation of the Superior Educa- 
 tion Fund j in the degradation of degrees conferred by Protestant Uni- 
 yersities *, in the matter of the marriage laws ; in the law of com- 
 pulsory tithing, and the erection of parishes for civil purposes, both 
 creating motives for the removal of Protestants, and generally in the 
 yirtual establishment of one church to the disadvantage of all other 
 churches. 
 
 " Furthermore, we declare that the Protestant community of the Pro- 
 Tince of Quebec are unwilling to be indebted to the generosity or liber- 
 ality of their Roman Catholic fellow-countrymen, but demand simple 
 jnetice and their equal rights as subjects of the Queen. 
 
 '* It was resolved to transmit the foregoing statement to the hon. 
 member for North Simcoe (Ool. O'Brien), with the request that it be 
 
28 
 
 € 
 
 1495 
 
 read to the House of Oommoas by himself, or some other member h* 
 may select. 
 
 "J. COOPER ANTLIPP,D.D., 
 ''President of the Montreal Protestant Assoeiation. 
 
 "WM. sairTH, 
 
 " Sicretary-Treasurer." 
 This is the commauication, Sir, of the Protestant Miois* 
 terial AsBOciation of Montreal, duly signed by its ofElcers. 
 
 Now, Mr. Speaker, I have bat few words to say in con- 
 clusion. I wish. Sir, to refer to a statement made by my 
 hon. friend the member for Bothwell (Mr. Mills), that if 
 ministers would preach the gospel instead of preaching 
 politics, it would be very much more in the line of their 
 duty, and more conducive to the public interests. I have 
 heard this charge brought against ministers before — the 
 charge of preaching politics. I remember, Sir, in the 
 great struggle in the United States, when the life of 
 the nation was at stake, and when the slave power 
 was making gigantic efforts to strangle liberty in that 
 country, that the ministers cf the country who stiood up in 
 defence of righteousness and right, were accused of preach- 
 ing politics, one of the charges brought against them was 
 that they were stepping outside of their legitim ate province. 
 When they were preaching opposition to slavery and exhort- 
 ing men to patriotism, whether they wore preaching politics 
 or not, they were performing a good work. I hold that, in 
 every emergency, when the liberties of a country are at 
 stake, the minister is a dumb dog who does not raise his 
 voice, warning his fellow citizens, and seeking by every 
 influence he posse(>6os to promote the right and combat the 
 -wrong; and if ministers in this country today see it to be 
 their duty to warn the country of dangers impending, to 
 warn it of the crisis threatened to be precipitated upon it, 
 I say let them do so ; if they do not do so, they are recreant 
 to their trust and duly. 
 
 Sir, I conclude whatl|have to say to-night by asserting 
 that I believe this Jesuits' Estates Act is an unconstitutional 
 Act, because the society is under the ban of British law ; I 
 believe further that it is an unconstitutional Act by reason 
 of the reference contained in the Bill to His Holiness the 
 Pope ; I believe further that it is unconstitutional by reason 
 of the diversion of school funds in the Province of Quebec 
 from their legitimate and proper purpose. And in addition 
 to these three counts of unconstitutionality, I believe that 
 upon the highest grounds of public interest and public good, 
 npon the ground of due consideration of the public weal, 
 present and future, in this Dominion, that this Act should 
 have been disallowed in conformity with the power pos- 
 sessed by the Government of this country. 
 
 A. 8UIB0AL, Superintendeut ot Printing* 
 
>f