IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) y ^ Wo / C/j W' ^..^ 1.0 I.I 11.25 M 1.8 iA mil 1.6 ^ /a ^/. W ^^m fit' /-/^ 7 i^* *# w Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872:-4S03 4^ iV pposition, and what did he say ? He said lat his speech was eloquent, and he very pro- erly congratulated him on the eloquence of his |reat speech ; but he said at the same time that was ^nothing more o- less than a bundle of ontradictions from beginning to end. Did he Ike up that speech, and show wherein the !ader of the Opposition was chargeable with ne single contradiction ? No, sir, not at all. le devoted himself to an exultation of his own ''u^'u u? ^''1'^ ^'■'^^''y deplored the discord hich this debate would create in this country s the result of turning nationalities and creeds gainst each other. Was there ever a speech elivered in this House more calculated to turn lass and creed against each other than th^ leech of the hon. gentleman ? He is the great am. According to his own statement, he ladc- Nova Scotia ; after he made Nova Scotia e created the Dominion ; he is now engaged in le unification of the Empire, and when he has )mpleted that work, he is going to tackle the iiverse. The hon. gentleman claims thai in a cture he delivered as a youth he laid the undations of confederation. I have always iderstood that the Hon. Joseph Howe and r Alexander Gait were the first men who troduced that question, they being followed by on. George Brown, and to Mr. Brown more an to any other man confederation is due I ive stated that the speech of the Secretary of State was calculated more than any speech to which I have ever listened to turn c?eed against creed and nationality against nationality. He reL^T^rJT ""'""^ tothecountr in that regard. But there is a party in this 1 ,use to whom the country owes a gratitude for the manly position they have taken. I refer to the French Liberals of the Province of Quebec. But for them we might have a war of races • owing to their noble conduct, however, they have averted such a disaster. What did the hon. Secretary of State do ? He took position, af.er position to show how the Liberal parted had been unjust from confederation forwards t? the Roman Catholic minority. Lj the hon gentleman aware that there is a Conservative party in Ontario ? What has been the conduct of that party for many years past ? Is that not the party which has attempted to wreck the cons itution, to destroy separate schools in that province, ^o put down the French language Three successive elections have been run on those lines m Ontario, and the chief of the party who ran the elections in the interest of the Conservatives has received his reward, and is now Chief Justice of the province. From whom has he received his reward ? From the very men who are now claiming that they are defending the rights of the Catholic minority.' So far as the rights of the Catholic minority are concerned, their defence is more largely to be credited to the Liberal party than to any other party in the country. Hon. gentlemen opposite have asserted that the leader of the Opposition was making a great bid for power. The Minister of Finance said the other day that my hon friend was playing a bold game ; he even referr- ed to cards up his sleeves, but the hon. Minister knows more about matters of that kind than I do. The Conservative party to-day, driven into a corner, are making a desperate bid for the entire Roman Catholic vote of the Dominion. But they are not going to obtain it, for the Roman Catholics well know that the present Government have made this school question a political one throughout. They have simply ...^ »\uman L.atriuUi;s,ana rhey in turn 't; Nfc.— -' ■\J I \ } do not trust the Government. The Liberal t)arty ave a party that will not do more for Roman Catholics than for Protestants, but wili mete out equal-handed justice to al'. As re- gards the question before the House, I am not afraid, as I have never been afraid, to state my own views and position upon it. My views no doubt differ to a considerable extent from those held by some hon. gentlemen who will vote as I will vote upon this question. From the speech delivered by the Minister of Finance a tew days ago,it was evident that a great change had come over the position of certain parties in this country. I was highly amused to hear a Con- servative argue exactly on the same lines so far as the rights of the minorities are concern- ed as we in Ontario have been arguing for many years past. As I understand the ques- tion, separate schools are guaranteed to the province of Ontario under confederation ; dis- sentient schools in Quebec are in exactly the same position. I have always understood that the separate school system originated at the instance cf the Protestants of Quebec. I know this from an acquaintance with dissentient schools in Quebec, that the Protestants of that irovince will not be willing to surrender them ; ...*d I further believe that the Roman Catholics in that province have done even handed justice I to the Protestants and will continue to do so. So far as Ontario is concerned, I believe the same conditions will prevail, and to my mind it is not a question as to whether we like separate ; schools or not, but the question is what has been guaranteed under the constitution to the minorities in those two provinci in that re- spect. Those conditions we are bound to maintain. So far as I am concerned public schools would satisfy n^e, and 1 want nothing more ; but I am not disposed to ask other men to take my medicine. As I understand it, the only difference between Protestant and Catho- lic on this question is one of degree. In Que- bec, the Protestants want separate schools, and in Ontario the Catholics want separate schools. It is true the Protestants are satisfied with a less degree of religion in their schools, I believe, than the Roman Catholics are, and it is only in this respect that they differ. Now, Mr. Speaker, my views on this question are as follows : In so far as the maritime prov- inces are concerned, I do not think that the Dominion Government would have any right at all to interfere. These provinces had their legislatures before confederation, and no change was made at that time. I believe, that in so far as these provinces are concerned, it is with- in their own jurisdiction to continue their school affairs as they please. In so far as the provinces of Ontario and Quebec are concerned, we have the separate schools as a fixture, and I do not believe that they will, or can be changed. Now, then, in so far as Manitoba is concerned, and in so far as any provinces that may in the future come into confederation are concerned, I believe that the same rights should be ek tended to these new provinces as exist in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec. In so far as the minority in the province of Manitoba are con- cerned, I am perfectly willing that they should have well regulated separate schools. I be- lieve that a grievance exists, and I believe that that grievance should be remedied. But, Mr. Speaker, I am not prepared to vote for a law that coerces Manitoba. I believe that that ques- tion can be settled in a far quicker way than by a resort to such means. I believe in the proposi- tion of the hon. leader of the Opposition. An hon. member. Of course you do. Som« hon. gentleman says "of course you do '■ Well, whether my leader propounded that doctrine or not, I would certauily believe in it. I have said, Sir, that a grievance exists, and that that grievance should be remedied. But, Mr. Speaker, I further believe that the Government have been playing with this question for the last six years. I am not a lawyer, and I do not pretend to know anything about constitutional law, but there is one thing which appers very strange indeed to me, and that is, that this very Government which allowed the Manitoba School Act to become law, asks us to day to wipe out that Act by legislation in this House. Why did they ever;' allow the Act to go into force when they could exercise the veto power ? So far as I am con- cerned, their course seems to me to be devoid of reason and common sense. It seems to nie perfectly absurd, that this Government which allowed the Act to go into force, and who put themselves under the shadow of the courts of the land, until finally they are driven into a corner on the question, should come and ask this Parliament to restore the school laws of Manitob i'hich existed before 1890, and which they the selves allowed to be abolished. Al- though I do not believe in disallowance generally, I do believe that this Act^ of 1890 should have been disallowed. Strongly as 1 believe in restoring their rights to the minority of Manitoba, I am not prepared to vote to-day for this Bill, because I believe that a joint commission appointed by this Government and by the Manitoba government would arrive at a solution of the question, and would settle it in a manner far more satisfactory to the countr) than by making it a political question, as has been done Mr. Speaker, I will not delay tht House any longer. There are several other gentlemen who wish to speak. I have expressed my views upon the subject and I have nothing more to say. \ V-1 ;an be changed. 1 is concerned, lat may in the are concerned, should be eic s exist in the c. In so far as anitoba are con- lat they should chools. I be I I believe that ied. But, Mr. vote for a law e that that ques- it way than by a ! in the proposi- pposition. you do. 'of course you 2v propounded srtauily believe rievance exists, i be remedied, lelieve that the ■ing with this . I am not a know anything ere is one thing ;ed to me, and ernment which Act to become lut that Act by ly did they ever yhen they could Far as I am con- ne to be devoid It seems to nie i^ernment which :e, and who put of the courts of e driven into a 1 come and ask school laws ol 1890, and which abolished. Al n disallowance lis Act of 1890 Strongly as I to the minority i to vote to-day ve that a joint jovernment and rould arrive at a )uld settle it in a to the countr) question, as ha; ill not delay the re several other I have expressed I I have nothing