IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 
 2.5 
 
 -_ ill]: 
 
 IIIM |||||Z2 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 
 1.25 1.4 
 
 1.6 
 
 1 : 
 
 
 -^ 
 
 6" — 
 
 
 ► 
 
 V] 
 
 <^ 
 
 /a 
 
 ^;. 
 
 ^ 
 
 m 
 
 <P3 
 
 0% ^> 
 
 w S' 
 
 
 O^h,. 
 
 M 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 ^» t^\ 
 
 
 ^ 
 
»• 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
 
 1980 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Noteft/Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The 
 to tl 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual mv^thod of filming, are checited below. 
 
 □ Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 □ Covers damaged/ 
 Couverture endommagda 
 
 □ Covers restored and/or l&min&ted/ 
 Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicul6e 
 
 □ Cover title missing/ 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes g6ographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 □ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou Illustrations en couleur 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli6 avec d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La reliure serr^e peut causer de lombre ou de la 
 distortion le long de la marge intdrieure 
 
 D! 
 
 D 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear withii.i the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas 6t6 filmdes. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppl^mentaires; 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm6 le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du 
 point do vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger uiie 
 modification dans la methods normale de filmage 
 sont indiquds ci-dessous. 
 
 I — I Coloured pages/ 
 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 Pages restored and/oi 
 
 Pages restaur6es et/ou pelliculdes 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxei 
 Pages d6colon§es, tachat6es ou piqudes 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages d6tach6es 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Quality in^gale de I'impresston 
 
 Includes supplementary materii 
 Comprend du mi»t<4rial sjpplemontaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule 6dition disponible 
 
 I — I Pages damaged/ 
 
 I — I Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 
 I — I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 
 I I Pages detached/ 
 
 I I Showthrough/ 
 
 I — I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 j — I Includes supplementary material/ 
 
 I — I Only edition available/ 
 
 The 
 
 POS! 
 of tl 
 film 
 
 Oris 
 
 beg 
 
 the 
 
 sior 
 
 othi 
 
 first 
 
 sior 
 
 or il 
 
 The 
 shal 
 TIN 
 whi 
 
 Ma| 
 diffi 
 enti 
 beg 
 righ 
 reqi 
 met 
 
 D 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., havo been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont 6t6 film6es d nouveau de fa9on & 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 r~7] This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 V 
 
 26X 
 
 30X 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 n 
 
 32X 
 
The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the gen<«rosity of: 
 
 Library of the Public 
 Archives of Canada 
 
 L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit yrfice d la 
 g6n6rosit6 de: 
 
 La biblioth6que des Archives 
 publiques du Canada 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in Iceeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire film6, et en 
 conformit6 avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprimde sont fiim^s en commenpant 
 pai le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont filmds en commenpant par la 
 premidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 The last recorded framb -. each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol -^^ (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur lu 
 dernidre image de cheque rrjicrofiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbols ~»- signifie "A SUIVRE ", le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those 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: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 filmds d des taux de reduction diffdrents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre 
 reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 d partir 
 de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images n6cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la mdthode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
THE 
 
 SENATE 
 
 FIFTH SESSION-EIGHTH PARLIAMENT 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 or 
 
 HON. SENATOR LANDRY 
 
 AND 
 
 DEBATE ON THE MANITOBA SCHOOL QUESTION 
 
 OTTAWA, TUESDAY, JUNE 12, 1900 
 
 Hon. iMr. liANDRiC rose to inquire : 
 
 1. Does the government know that the Catholic 
 minority of Manitoba contends that it has been 
 injured in the exercise of its rights with respect 
 to the maintenance of its schools, and that it 
 has demanded, as a remedy for Its grievances, 
 three things: 
 
 (a) Separate schools. 
 
 (b) A grant to sustain them 
 
 (c) Exemption from taxes for the maintenance 
 of Protestant schools? 
 
 2. By the judgment rendered on January 29, 
 1895, by the Lords of the Judicial Committee of 
 the Privy Council and by the order In council 
 of Her Majesty the Queen in Council, dated Feb- 
 ruary 2, 1895, is it decreed that rhe Catholic 
 minority of Manitoba has just grievances, the 
 redress of which, as a question of appeal to be 
 decided, falls within the jurisdiction of the 
 Governor General in Council? 
 
 3. Did the Governor General in Council, by 
 an order dated March 21, 1895, order the legisla- 
 ture of Manitoba to modify its school legislation 
 in such a way as to give the Catholic minority 
 in Manitoba: 
 
 (a) The right to construct, maintain, furnish, 
 manage, conduct and sustain Roman Catholic 
 schools in the manner provided for by the Acts 
 which the statutes of 1890 have repealed; 
 
 (b) The right to share In any subsidy made 
 out of the public funds for the needs of public 
 instruction; 
 
 (c) The right of the Roman Catholics who 
 shall contribute to sustain the Roman Catholic 
 schools to be exempt from all payments or con- 
 tributions destined for the maintenance of other 
 schools? 
 
 4. Has the legislature of Manitoba conformed 
 with these prescriptions of the remedial order? 
 
 5. Has not the legislature, on the contrary, 
 answered in the negative: 
 
 (a) By a first refusal given on July 25, 1895; 
 
 (b) By a second refusal given on December 
 21, 1895, rejectlne an attempt at reconciliation; 
 
 (c) By a third refusal of the propositions made 
 by the delegates sent to Winnipeg on March 28, 
 1896? 
 
 6. In the face of this triple refusal, did not 
 the Conservative government propose for adop- 
 tion by the Canadian parliament certain legisla- 
 tion, called remedial legislation, substituting the 
 Canadian parliament tor the Manltoban legisla- 
 ture in the measures of justice to be granted 
 the Catholic minority of Manitoba for the redn.'ss 
 of their grievances? 
 
 7. On March 22, 1896. did cot the House of 
 Commons accept the princlole of federal inter- 
 vention In the settlement of the Manitoba schools 
 difficulty by adopting, by a vote of 112 to 94, 
 the second reading of the Remedial Bill? 
 
 S. On April 14 of the same year, did not Sir 
 Charles Tupper read to the House of Commons 
 the following telegram from Monselgneur the 
 Archbishop of St. Boniface, making known the 
 adherence of the Catholic minority to the re- 
 medial measure: 
 
 Montreal, April 13, 1896. 
 
 In the name of the Catholic minority cf Mani- 
 toba, that I represent officially, I ask the House 
 of Commons to pass the whole Remedial Act 
 as it is now amv nded. It will be satisfactory 
 ti the said Catholic minority, that will consider 
 It as a substantial, workable and final settle- 
 ment of the school question according to the 
 constitution. 
 
 (Sgi.) ADELARD LANGEVIN. 
 
 9. Was not the final adoption of the Remedial 
 Bill prevented only by an Interminable discus- 
 
I ^ 00 
 
 Blon, which was prolonged until the last days of 
 parliament? 
 
 10. In the general elections of 1836, did not 
 the j/.beral party iiiak'> to the electorate the 
 solemn promise to render tull and entire jus- 
 tice to the Catholic minority, as appears, amoriisst. 
 other things, by the following declarations pub- 
 lished by the press and brought to the knowl- 
 «dge of the voters: 
 
 (a) Extract from a speech made by tne Hon. 
 Mr. Laurier at Jacques Cartier Hall, in Quebec, 
 May 7, 1898, as published by ' L'^lecteur ' of 
 May 8, 1396: 
 
 (Translation from the French.) 
 
 ' Do not misunderstand my intentions. I re- 
 peat here that I wish the minority in Manitoba 
 to obtain entire justice. It Is a principle writ- 
 ten in letters of gold in the programme of my 
 party that the rights of the minority must be 
 respected 
 
 ' If the people of Canada biing me into power, 
 as I have a conviction they will, I will settle 
 this question to the saMsfaction of all parties 
 interested. I shall have fflth me in my gov- 
 ernment Sir Oliver Mowat, who has always been 
 in Ontario, at the peril of his own popularity, 
 the champion of the Catholic minority and of 
 separate schools. I will put him at the head 
 of a commission where all the interests at stake 
 shall be represented, and I affirm to you that 
 I will succeed in satisfying those who are suf- 
 fering at this moment. Is not Sir Oliver Mowat's 
 n&me alone a guarantee of the success of this 
 plan? 
 
 ' An-^i then, finally, if conciliation Joes not 
 succeed, I shall have to exerclst that constitu- 
 tional recourse which the law furnishes, a re- 
 course which I shall exercise completely and 
 entirely.' 
 
 (b) Declaration signed by the Hon. Charles 
 Fitzpatrick: 
 
 'Being sincerely disposed to put aside all party 
 spirit and all questions of men, in order to se- 
 cure the triumph of the Catholic cause in Mani- 
 toba, I, the undersigned, promise, it elected, to 
 conlorm myself to the bishops' mandement in 
 all points, and to viite for a measure according 
 the Catholics of Manitoba that justice to which 
 they have a riglit by virtue of the judgment of 
 the Privy Council, provided tLai the measure be 
 approved of by my bishop If Mr. Laurier 
 reaches power, and doca not settle the question 
 at the first session, in accordance with the terms 
 of the mandement, I promise either to withdraw 
 my support or resign. 
 
 • ^Sgd.) C. FITZPATRICK. 
 
 ' Ste. Marie, June 6, 1896. 
 
 ' Copy compared with original. 
 
 ■ B. PH. GARNEAU, Priest. 
 ' Secretary of the Archbishop of Quebec' 
 
 (See also House of Commons Debates, 1897, page 
 163.) 
 
 (c) Declaration of the Hon. Mr. Geoffrion, pub- 
 lished iu ' Le Soir ' newspaper, of Thursday, June 
 11, 1896, reproduced in the House of Commons 
 ' Hansard ' of 1896 (2nd session), page 230: 
 
 ' I am here to make the declaration imposed 
 upon nie )>y my bishop in the mandement which 
 haj been read iu all the churches of the pro- 
 vince. That mandement presses upon the voters 
 the duiy of registering their vote only in favour 
 cf those candidates who shall take the solemn 
 and t rnial pledge of supporting an adequate 
 lemedia! law, restoring to the Catholic minority 
 the rights which have been talcen away from 
 them. Now, gentlemen, I am jere to publicly 
 
 make In your presence tl . declaraticn Imposed 
 upon me by my bishop, ind I now take before 
 you a solemn pledge to that effect. I shall 
 vote in favour of a remedial law such as re- 
 quired by the blshoys, an operative law restoring 
 to Catholics of Manitoba all the rights adjudi- 
 cated upon by the Privy Council judgment, but 
 at the same time I declare that I shall see to 
 it that their rights and not crumbs be given 
 back to them, for the Catholici.^ do not ask char- 
 ity, they are not mendicants, they claim their 
 own rights.' 
 
 11. After the general elections, during the first 
 session of ihe eighth parliament, did not the 
 Hon. Sir CharleB Tupper, the leader of the cp- 
 posltion, on Au{;ust 24, 1896, from his place la 
 the House of Commons, make the following de- 
 claratlo.n, to be found in the Official Report of 
 the Debutes of the House of Commons of Canada, 
 vol. xliil., column 57: 
 
 ' In the future, as in the past, the cardinal 
 principle with the great party to which I have 
 the honour to belong, will be: Equal justice to 
 all, without respect to race or creed. I am glad 
 to know that the responsibility of Beetling this 
 question — an important question, although not so 
 gravely important as I had supposed — I am glad 
 to know that the responsibility refits no longer 
 upon ~\y shiiulders. but upon those of the hon. 
 gentleman who is now the First Minister of 
 the Crown. I can only say that I trust and 
 sincerely hope that he will be i lost sur.cessful in 
 obtaining such a settlement of this question as 
 will do justice and give satisfaction to all par- 
 ties. I can assure the hon. gentleman not only 
 that he has my most cordial wishes for a happy, 
 and early, and fair settlement of this Important 
 ouestion, but 'Lit anything that I can contribute 
 to that fciil will be at all times most cheerfully 
 done.' 
 
 12. Has the prestnt government availed itself 
 of this offer of the leader of the opposition, 
 and has it profited by it to settle the Manitoba 
 schools question in such a maLcer as to render 
 justice to the minority? 
 
 13. If not, why not ? 
 
 14. Did the hoa. the Secretary of State, on 
 May 2, 1898, make the following declaration to 
 the Senate: 
 
 ' Hon. Mr. SCOTT. — The present government 
 have settled the school question with Manitoba. 
 They adopted the same channels to settle that 
 question as the late govern:Tient did. The late 
 government sent delegates to Manitoba and had 
 a conference and failed to come to any agree- 
 ment. The present government had a confer- 
 ence with representatives of the government of 
 Manitoba, and they came to an agreement, which 
 was confirmed by the Manitoba legislature, and 
 that is the end of it, so far as the public are 
 concerned.' — (Senate Debates, 1898, page 663.) 
 
 15. Was not the Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier re- 
 P'lrted by ' La Patrie ' of September 28, 1899, 
 to have uttered at Drummondvillo, on September 
 26 last, the following words : — 
 
 (Translation.) 
 
 • You kno ." that In ISOfi an irritating question 
 was causing trouble in the country. It was a 
 question where religion and politics were con- 
 fo'.inded. We came into power. We ha ^e pro- 
 m'«!Pd "T settle the que.?lion in six months. You 
 are witnesses that this promise has been ful- 
 filled to the letter. The school question does 
 not exist any longer, although our friends the 
 Blues seek to bring it up again.' — (House of Com- 
 mons debates, 1900, March 28, rev. ed., col. 2749.) 
 
 Hi. What is the position taken by the federal 
 e.\-ecutiv3 towards the parties in the case, the 
 government of Manitoba of the one part and 
 
 the 
 part, 
 anno 
 on 
 befoi 
 had I 
 a de( 
 17. 
 
 ///^3:/ 
 
the Catholic minority of Manitoba of the other 
 part, In that understanding which was offlclally 
 announced by the hon. the Secretary of States 
 on May 2, 189S? Is It the position of a Judge 
 before whose tribunal the question In litigation 
 had already been brought, and who had rendered 
 a decision knj.vn aa the remedial order? 
 
 17. Did the present government, when holding 
 a conference wkh the government of Manitoba, 
 simultaneously treat with the other party In 
 the case, the Catholic minority? 
 
 18. Was that minority a party to th^ said 
 conference, and has the arrangement which was 
 made been accepted by the Catholic minority? 
 
 19. On the contrary, has not the arrangement 
 in question been repudiated and denounced — 
 
 (aj By the head of the Catholic Church; 
 (c) By the Catholic minority of Manitoba ; 
 (b) By the episcopate ? 
 
 20. Has the government ever taken kno.vlelge 
 of the following words of Leo XIII., in his en- 
 cyclical letter (' Affari Vos ', of December 8, 1897, 
 t--ncerniug ' the understanding ratified by the 
 li.'gi.-lature of Manitoba,' of which the hoa. the 
 fiecrei.^ry o£ State speaks: 
 
 ' The law which they have passed to repair 
 the inju.-y is defective, unsuitable. Insufficient. 
 The Cathilics a,sk, and no one can deny that 
 
 they justlj ask, foi much more 
 
 In a word, t^e rights of Catholics and the 
 education of their children have not been suffi- 
 ciently provided for in Manitoba.' — (See House 
 of Commons Debates, 1898, column 5338.) 
 
 21. Is the government ignorant that the Cana- 
 dian episcopate has pronounced in an unequivo- 
 cal manner upon the value of the Laurier-Green- 
 way arrangement, and has it read tho following 
 declarations: 
 
 (Translation.) 
 
 ' (a) A new government replaced the old one, 
 and one day we learned that between it and the 
 government of Manitoba an nnderstandin? had 
 come about, a compromise had been drawn up. 
 
 ' This compromise was not the restitution of 
 the violated rights, it was not even an ameliora- 
 tion which might bo reconciled with the formal 
 prescriptions of the church. How could the 
 episcopate approve of it? It therefore declared 
 it unacceptable, and the Catholics of Manitoba 
 continued to maintain their own schools at the 
 pr'ce of the greatest sacrifices.' 
 
 ' The agreement effected between the federal 
 authorities of Ottawa and the provincial gov- 
 ernment of Winnipeg, an agreement to which 
 they would like to give the name of settle- 
 ment of the school question, is declared ' (by 
 the Holy Father) ' defective, imperfect, insuffi- 
 cient, and therefore cannot be accepted as an 
 equitable solution of the quef.don. It is, there- 
 fore, with reason that that agreement has been 
 repudiated by the episcopate, and that the Manl- 
 toban minority would not submit thereto." — (Pas- 
 toral letter of Mgr. Begin, dated January 6, 
 1898.) 
 
 (See also House of Commons Debates, 1898, 
 column 5342.) 
 
 ' (b) The negotiations which have taken place 
 between the local authorities of Winnipeg and 
 the federal authorities of Ottawa, have ended 
 in an understanding which is given as the 
 settlement of the grave school question. First 
 of all, I protest against this word settlement. 
 In a question in litigation, nothing is settled If 
 the two interested parties do not agree at all 
 between themselves. 
 
 ' What is the contract that it is wished to 
 Impose upon us? 
 
 ' The sum of the eight articles concerning re- 
 ligious instruction is the official proclamation 
 
 of the principle of common and neutral schools. 
 
 Let me tell you immediately that 
 
 common and neutral schools have been condemn- 
 ed by the church No Catholic, 
 
 therefore, can approve of these schools unless 
 he wishes to separate himself from the centre 
 of unity.' — (Sermon of Mgr. the Archbishop of 
 St. Boniface, dated November 22, 1896.) 
 
 '(c) As you know, quite as well as I, in spite 
 of so many emphatic promises, the Manl'oba 
 school question has not been settled at all ac- 
 cording to the rights of honour and justice. 
 The understanding come to between the repre- 
 sentatlve'o of the central government of Ot- 
 tawa and of the local government of Manitoba Is 
 only a sacrifice of the rights and interests of 
 our co-religionists of this province, without an 
 acceptable compensation. Also, have not the 
 terms and conditions of this understanding, 
 which is only a cowardly and shameful capitula- 
 tion, accomplished in the shadows and in secret, 
 been revealed to the public when its authors had 
 acquired the certainty that the enemies of our 
 religion aud of our race would aid them to 
 impose upon a minority which had been per- 
 secuted and despoiled for six years past. . . . 
 Let It suffice me to draw your attention to the 
 fact that the pretended settlement of the Mani- 
 toba schools question does not mean anything 
 definite, but the criminal sanction of the estab- 
 lishment for the Catholics of this province, " of 
 neutral schools," which the Holy Church has 
 always repudiated and condemned.'— (Circular of 
 Mgr. Blals, Bishop of Rimouski.) 
 
 ' (d) Like my venerable colleagues, I do not 
 hesitate an instant to disapprove of it absolutely 
 myself (the Laurier-Greenway settlement), and I 
 ': add, with Mgr. Begin, that no bishop will or can 
 approve of the so-called settlement of the Mani- 
 I toba schools question, which is not definitely 
 I based upon anything but an unjustifiable aban- 
 ' donment of the best established and the most 
 sacred rights of the Catholic minority.— (Circular 
 f f Mgr. Laflfiche, bishop of Three Rivers, Febru- 
 ary 11. 1897.) 
 
 ' (e) All the bishops of Canada, after receiving 
 the encyclical, ' Affari Vos,' unanimously repu- 
 diated and denounced the Laurier-Greenway ar- 
 rangement in the terms employed by Mgr. 
 I Begin.' 
 
 ! 22. Does the government not know that In a 
 
 I memorandum prepared for the Holy See by 
 
 the Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier, and signed by 
 
 I him, and bearing date November 23, 1896, it is 
 
 written: 
 
 ' The population of Manitoba at the last cen- 
 sus was 152,506, of whom 20,.571 were Catholics, 
 disseminated over ninety municipalitie':.' — (See 
 House of Commons Debates, 1898, column 5378.) 
 And is the government ignorant that out of 
 these 20,571 Catholics of ninety different munici- 
 palities, only forty-one Catholicii have made 
 known their approval of the present Laurier- 
 Greenway settlement in a document produced 
 before parliament, whilst the Catholics of Winni- 
 peg, Ste. Pierre Joly, Ste. Anne des Chftnes, St. 
 Charles, Lorette, Ste. Agathe. &c., have made 
 ird'gnant protests and passed resolutions con- 
 demning the pretended arrangement, copies nf 
 which protests and resolutions have been laid 
 upon the Table of this House. — (See Document 
 No. 35, second session, eighth parliament, 60-61 
 Vict, 1897.) 
 
 23. In the face of multiplied condemnations, 
 does the government really think that an ar- 
 rangement to which the Catholic minority has 
 not even been a party, but which was concluded 
 without its necessary participation, without its 
 knowledge, and contrary to its Interests, can 
 be considered as an arrangement putting an and 
 
to the ManUoba schools difficulty, as the gov- 
 ernment, by the mouth of the hon. Secretary 
 of State, has declared It to be? 
 
 24. Cannot the present government, which has 
 regarded neither pecuniary sacrifices nor the 
 more severe sacrifice of human lives, when It was 
 a question of causing a coercive policy to be 
 adopted, and imposing by force of numbers on 
 a South African people the obligation to grant 
 British subjects advantages which tbey did not 
 have, now find the moral sense, the energy and 
 the means, and can it not submit itself to the 
 imperative duty of impcsing upon those who 
 violate the treaties and misuse the constitution 
 the obligation of respecting both, by granting 
 the British subjects established in Manitoba the 
 exercise of their religious rights, and especially 
 of granting to fathers of families the sacred 
 right of bringing up their children and having 
 them instructed in conformity with the dictates 
 of their consciences? 
 
 25. Does the government wish to continue to 
 ignore the decrees of the Privy Council in Eng- 
 land and the obligations or the remedial order, 
 which exist In all their force and fulness, or 
 does it Intend to put them in force in accord- 
 ance with the promise so to do, solemnly made 
 to the electorate by him who is to-day Prime 
 Minister of this country, and upon whom is in- 
 cumbent the duty of safeguarding the rights of 
 the mincrity and not prostituting the honour 
 and dignity of the Crown? 
 
 I may also put the second c[ lestion now, 
 since it relates to the same subject : 
 
 1. Did the Governor General in Council, on the 
 21st March, 1895, render judgm3nt upon the 
 appeal brought before his tribunal by the Catho- 
 lic minority iu Manitoba, and is that judgment 
 known under the name of ' The Remedial 
 Order ? ' 
 
 2. Did not that Judgment order the legislature 
 of Maaitobu to do justice to the recognized 
 grievances of the Catholic minority of that pro- 
 vince ? 
 
 3. Has the legislature of Manitoba complied 
 with that judgment, and has it remedied the 
 grievances of the Catholics? 
 
 4. If justice has not been rendered to the 
 minority Injured in its rights, does the govern- 
 ment intend to exact that the judgment rend- 
 ered shall be executed, and is It going to take 
 the steps to have It executed? 
 
 5. The case v.-hich this school question cause 
 to rise having been appealed to the Federal 
 tribunal, and a Judgment having been rendered 
 by that tribunal, is it not precisely upon that 
 tribunal and upon no other that the obligation 
 falls of causing its Judgment to be respected? 
 
 6. When is thfi government going to cause the 
 constitution and the Judicial decrees to be re- 
 spected, and when will the federal government, 
 which, by law, is constituted the protector of 
 the rights of minorities, treat this school ques- 
 tion from the point of view of right and duty 
 and not at all as a question serving as a stepping 
 stone for certain politicians ? 
 
 Hon. Mr. MIDLS— I intend that the an- 
 swer which 1 shall give the hon. gentle- 
 man shall be an answer to the series of 
 questions which he has put and also to those 
 questions which are still on the paper to be 
 put to me, as they relate to the same sub- 
 ject and in order that there may be no 
 misapprehension as to what my answer Is, 
 
 I shall read It to the House for its Informa- 
 tion. It is as follows : The hon. senator 
 has put to me a very long series of ques- 
 tions containing a great many details. These 
 questions do not relate to matters of infor- 
 mation that are within my special keeping, 
 or within the special keeping of the govern- 
 ment, but with regard to what has trans- 
 pired in the legislature of Manitoba, In the 
 parlliiment of Canada in former times, In 
 the Judicial Committee of the Privy Coun- 
 cil, and in the Privy Council of Canada. 
 
 The hon. senator, i think, entirely misap- 
 prehends the law of parliampnt In respect 
 to questions put to ministers of the Crown. 
 Sir Erskine May, in his * Parliamentary 
 Practice,' says : ' Questions addressed to 
 ministers shall relate to the public affairs 
 with which they are officially connected, To 
 proceedings pending in parliament, or to 
 any matter of administration for which the 
 minister is responsible.' The questions 
 which tne hon. senator has put, do not come 
 within any of these provisions of the law 
 of parliament. 
 
 If the hon. gentleman is not satisfied with 
 the settlement of the school question In 
 Manitoba, he may, upon a substantative 
 motion, bring the matter before the Senate 
 for discussion. This he has not chosen to 
 do, but to put a series of questions to me, 
 as if I were a witness summoned before him 
 for examination, compelled to answer ques- 
 tions relating to matters that are not before 
 parliament. The matter about which the 
 lion, senator makejs irquiry in this long 
 series of interrogatories, is one which 
 led to a very great deal of acrimonious Uls- 
 cussion, and to not a little political excite- 
 ment; and as I am not seeking any offi- 
 cial appointment at the hands of the hon. 
 senator, nor do I know that any member 
 of the government Is, It Is not necessary 
 that I should undertake to pass an examina- 
 tion upon the list of questions which he 
 has submitted to me, and to which he de- 
 mands an answer. Every, member of this 
 House, Including the hon, senator, knows 
 something of the discussions that took place 
 on the question of separate schools In Mani- 
 toba just as well as they are known to the 
 government. The hon. senator has made 
 long quotations from various speeches and 
 papers, whether accurately made or not, I 
 do not know. Nor is It at all my duty to 
 
 inl 
 he 
 
 ac| 
 
 ad 
 
 ai 
 
 ofl 
 
 ml 
 
 It| 
 
 ni 
 pc 
 as 
 
 tv 
 se 
 
Inquire for the purpose of answering the 
 hon. member's question. 
 
 The hon. senator Icnows what the line of 
 action, which was proposed by a former 
 administration, was. He Bays that it was 
 approved of by a majority of the members 
 of the House of Commons in 1896. That 
 may be so. But it did not become law. 
 It was made an issue in the elections, and 
 upon that issue those who favoured the 
 policy which the hon. senator favours were, 
 as a ministry, defeated, and a majority re- 
 turned favourable to a different mode of 
 settlement. 
 
 The hon. gentleman ignores the fact 
 that Sir Charles Tupper has said on this 
 subject : ' Undei' these oircumstauces, as 
 I say, I And that I »ittached much greater 
 importance to this question than the result 
 ol' experience has shown to belong to it.' 
 
 Sir Charles Tupper, after the elections 
 were over, also said that he was defeated 
 by the division of his own party on this 
 question, and that ' a large section of in- 
 dependent, intelligent, able men all over 
 the Dominion thought that the government 
 had taken a wrong step, and,' be added, ' I 
 am not going into that question to-night, 
 because it is a dead Issue, and is past and 
 gone, therefore there is no occasion to go 
 into it.' The hon. leader of the Conserva- 
 tive party, in stating that it was a ' dead 
 issue,' also intimated that he was not going 
 to fight for a policy which those who were 
 affected by it did not sustain him in pur- 
 suing. 
 
 In August, 1896, Mr. Taylor, the whip of 
 the Tory party, at Owen Sound, said, ' the 
 Conservative party is now through wirh re- 
 medial legislation.' He said: 'That the 
 circumstances of this campaign were differ- 
 ent from the last, as the Remedial Bill was 
 no longer a part of the Conservative policy. 
 Sir Charles Tupper had sent word by him 
 to this effect to the electors of North Grey: 
 That good feeling had now been restored 
 between Sir Charles and Hon. Clarke 
 Wallace and the other anti-remedial Con- 
 servatives.' And the Hon. Clarke Wallace ' 
 said on the same occasion: ' It has been 
 announced that the erroneous policy of 
 forcing separate schools on Manitoba had 
 been abandoned. The gentlemen who lent 
 themselves to this policy were seeing the 
 errors of their ways. He was rejoiced to 
 
 know It; he would take them back into the 
 Conservative party, and <e them well.' 
 
 Mr. McLean, Conservative M.P. for East 
 York, in speaking at Henley's school house, 
 Grey County, iu August, 1896, said that Sir 
 Charles Tupper had personally Informed 
 him: 'We have got rid of the question 
 of the Remedial Bill for ever.' 
 
 It is not necessary that I should undertake 
 to discuss the Remedial Order, and the legal 
 objections which may be made to the course 
 of action therein suggested. The hon sena- 
 tor knows what the line of action was that 
 was proposed by the present administration, 
 and acted upon, in conjunction vvith the 
 government of Manitoba. He knows that 
 the entire Roman Catholic population out- 
 side of the city of Winnipeg have come 
 under the provisions of the amended school 
 law of 1897, which superseded the Act of 
 1890. It is reported to me that there were 
 eighty-one (81) Roman Catholic schools out- 
 side of Winnipeg, and that aU these have 
 accepted the settlement effected by the Act 
 of 1897, and have no desire to return to the 
 condition of things existing before 1890. In 
 the city of Winnipeg, in principle, the settle- 
 ment has been effected. There has been 
 some hitch in undertaking to carry out Its 
 details. My information is that under the 
 .Vet of 1897, the trustees of the school in this 
 city have not the power of binding 
 themselves by compact, that none but 
 Roman Catholic teachers shall be employed 
 in certain schools. As a matter of fact, 
 I understand they are prepared to do this, 
 and this is, so far as I know, the only point 
 at issue there, and, indeed, in the whole 
 province. 
 
 I have no doubt that if the parties are left 
 alone, this matter will be arranged, and the 
 features of the settlement that may at the 
 present moment be attended with some 
 friction, within the city of Winnipeg, may be 
 safely left to the softening Influence of 
 time, and to those concessions being made 
 In a period of quiet which are not so likely 
 to be carried out satisfactorily In a period 
 of excitement. I am sure that the hon. 
 senator's line of action upon this subject 
 cannot be otherwise than injurious to the 
 minority whose privilleges are affected. The 
 course which the bon. gentleman Is en- 
 deavouring to take, not In the interest of the 
 minority, but most mistakenly with the view 
 
of serving the Interest of party, is one that 
 is In the highest degree mischievous; and 1 
 fee that I best serve the public Interest, 
 and especially the Interest of the minority, 
 by declining to submit myself for an ex- 
 amination by the hon. gentleman lu the 
 various questions which he has proposed, but 
 which are wholly outside of any right that 
 the law of parliament confers upon him. 
 
 Hon. Mr. LANDRY— If the hon. minister, 
 who has just read his written answer, thinks 
 that I am Influenced by political motives, 
 and not by a desire to serve the Interest of 
 the minority, he Is mistaken. If ho thiulvs 
 his assei'tion is true, I might say that he 
 opens himself to the same accusation In his 
 answer to me. The answer given cannot 
 come from the Minister of Justice, nor from 
 a minister of the Crown ; it is the answer 
 given by a man who puts aside all senti- 
 ments of justice and fair play to worlc in the 
 Interest of his own political party. That is 
 what he does to-day in this chamber. And 
 what do we see ? The Minister of .Justice 
 declares himself unable to ascertain if a 
 speech made by the chief of his party, the 
 Prime Minister of this Dominion, has ever 
 really been delivered to the electorate of 
 this country. He is unable to ascertain if 
 declarations made by his colleague In this 
 House, the hon. Secretary of State, are true 
 or false. He is unable to ascertain if the 
 voice of the Catholic minority in Manitoba 
 has been heard in the councils of the nation. 
 He is unable to ascertain all tliose things, 
 bu. what ho is willing to And out is what 
 Mr. Taylor. Mr. Wallace and Mr. McLean 
 said in different parts of the country. But 
 why does ho not tell us that tho.se three 
 men are precisely those who voted against 
 the Remedial Bill in 1890 ? The principle of 
 the Remedial Bill was adopted in the House 
 of Commons on the second reading, and 
 those three gentlemen, whose remarks have 
 been quoted by the hon. Minister of Jus- 
 tice, are amongst the Liberals who voted 
 against that measure. They were defeated, 
 defeated with, the Liberals who opposed the 
 Conservative policy, and to-day the hon. 
 Minister of Justice brings before this House 
 the sayings of those gentlemen to prove 
 what ? Is it to prove that justice has been 
 done ? No. What does he want to prove ? 
 I fall to see ; perhaps he does not see him- 
 self, but blinded by the Interests of his 
 
 party, he comes with quotations which set 
 forth the views of those who were, like the 
 honourable minister's friends, opposing the 
 measure of justice submitted to parliament. 
 But all what said those opponents arc 
 not at all satisfactory answer to the ques- 
 tion. I claim that my questions are fully 
 iu line with all the authorities on the mat- 
 ter. I have alluded to a public question, 
 and the hon minister ought to know or 
 ought to acknowledge, because he knows 
 better, that this Manitoba school question Is 
 still before the government. He ought to 
 acknowledge that the government of this 
 country, acting in a judicial manner, ren- 
 dered a judgment. Has that judgment been 
 complied with ? Is that judgment wiped 
 away now ? It still remaint, and is still an 
 obligation resting on the ministry of the 
 day, and it is their Imperative duty to see 
 that the judgment rendered by the judicial 
 committee of their administration should be 
 complied with. They have add;- ^sed them- 
 selves to the legislature of Manitoba. Mani- 
 toba gave its answer. Manitoba refused on 
 threo different occasions to comply Avith the 
 judgment which has been rendered. That 
 refusal placed the question In the hands of 
 this parliament, and it is now the bounden 
 duty of the ministry to see that the con- 
 stitution of this country Is vindicated— to 
 see that the judgment of the Privy Council, 
 in England, and of their own Privy Council 
 should be executed. They have failed in 
 their duty. They do not want to discharge 
 tlieir duty ? True, the hon. Secretary of 
 .State told us that the question was settled, 
 settled by whom ? By a compromise that 
 took place between Avhom ? Between the 
 government, which was the judge, and the 
 legislature of Manitoba, one of the parties. 
 But where was the other party ? Was the 
 other party asked to assent to that com- 
 I)n)mise ? Never. When the delegation, sent 
 by the former government, left Ottawa, In 
 189(5, and went to Winnipeg, to try and 
 make a compromise which would be accept- 
 able to both parties and acceptable to the 
 minority, they failed in their mission, but 
 their instructions obliged them to consult 
 the minority and to assent to nothing that 
 that minority would not be prepared to ac- 
 cept. Nothing of the kind was done by the 
 present administration. This new govern- 
 ment made a compromise, but made a 
 compromise behind the back of the min- 
 
orlty, against their interest, wltlioat aslc- 
 ing the Interested party to accept or 
 to refuse the compromise. What have 
 we seen ? We have seen the Oathollc min- 
 ority rejecting that compromise, and to-day 
 If the hon. minister la not deaf— If he wants 
 to listen to the voice of the minority in 
 Manitoba, he will hear the representatives 
 of that minority crying out that Justice has 
 not been rendered yet. He will hear the 
 representatives of that minoirity telling him 
 that that question has not been settled yet. 
 The hon. minister refers to what took place 
 in the last «lection in the province of Que- 
 bec, but he seems to be mixed up and to 
 ignore totally what tooli place. In our pro- 
 vince the question put before the electors 
 was very clear and well defined. The 
 Prime Minister, at that time the leader of 
 the opposition, said : ' Sir Charles Tupper 
 and the Conservative party have tried to 
 settle the Manitoba school question by a 
 Remedial Bill, but that Remedial Bill was 
 not worth the paper on which it was writ- 
 ten. I will do better. I will give to the 
 Roman Catholic minority of that pro- 
 vince all its rights and if I cannot suc- 
 ceed by conciliation, I will have recourse 
 to what the law empowei-s me to do.' The 
 hon. gentleman promised the province of 
 Quebec that he would do better than his 
 predecessors, and the vote of the province 
 of Quebec was given to Sir Wilfrid Laurler. 
 Why ? Because he promised to do better 
 than Sir Charles Tupper and the other leaders 
 of the Conservative party, "a the province 
 of Quebec all the candidates if both parties 
 were in favour of the remedies that were 
 asl£ed for the Roman Catholic minority in 
 Manitoba. The elections of 189G were not a 
 condemnation of Sir Charles Tupper's policy. 
 If Mr. Laurler secured a majority in his 
 favour, it was solely because he promised 
 that he would do more than Sir Charles 
 Tupper had done, and yet the hon. minister 
 says that the province of Quebec and the 
 majority in the other provinces condemned 
 the course talien by the late government. 
 It might be that persons who 'xnow noth- 
 ing may. at first sight, loolv at those 
 elections as a condemnation, bur how 
 could they at the same time ignore 
 that the people that were elected were 
 obliged, in order to be elected, to sigu 
 a declaration by which they pledged them- 
 selves to grant more than was promised 
 
 by the late government. Does the hon. min- 
 ister ignore those facts ? If he ignores 
 tliem. he is not fit to occupy the position he 
 occupies as one of the advisers of the 
 Crown. 
 
 Hon. Mr. MILIiS— Hear, hear. 
 
 Hon. Mr. LANDRY— If he does not ignore 
 tilt in, why does he try to-day, by his an- 
 swers to serve the interests of his own 
 party against ail notions of Justice, by a fan- 
 tastical relation of facts which did not hap- 
 pen ? That Manitoiba school question 
 brought the hon. minister's party to power. 
 We can see now In what way. The hon. 
 gentleman says no. What was the division 
 in all the Dominion ? Setting aside for the 
 moment the province of Quebec, iboth par- 
 ties in the rest of the Dominion were about 
 equally divided. The majority gained by 
 the government In the elections of 1896, 
 was composed of precisely the majority ob- 
 tained in Quebec. That was their position 
 and we see now how their majority was ob- 
 tained. Will the hon. gentleman now deny 
 that he did not come into power solely by 
 that question ? I will venture to malie a 
 prediction to the honourable minister ; I 
 can tell him that he will go out of power on 
 the same question. His party promised jus- 
 tice. What has it given ? It has given us 
 stones in place of the bread promised not 
 only to the people of Quebec hut to all the 
 provinces. Those flagi-ant violations of their 
 most solemn pledges will turn against the 
 Liheral party. The hon. ministers to- 
 day are unable to face the situation. 
 They have failed in all their efforts 
 to try to remedy that question. And 
 why ? Because they did not accept the offer 
 made by them by tlie chief of the Conserva- 
 tive party in the House of Commons, when 
 Sir Charles Tupper rose in his seat in the 
 House of Coiumons to promise to the Prime 
 Minister to give him ail his help to settle 
 that question. Here is without any possible 
 doubt a question of public policy. It was 
 put to the hon. minister, and I asli him 
 why did not the Prime Minister accept 
 this offer ? What is the answer of the hon. 
 minister ? The only answer he gave was 
 to tell us that Messrs. Taylor, Wallace and 
 McLean have made certain declarations on 
 another subject. We know ail tliat, and it is 
 a very childish answer from the Minister of 
 Justice, who has a reputation to sustain, to 
 come and tell us that the parties who are 
 
8 
 
 agalust the Remedial BLl'l, who voted 
 at;alDst the Remedial Bill, persist In the po- 
 sition they took at Che time. 
 
 Hon. Mr. MILLS— They took Sir Charles 
 Tapper back Into the fold. 
 
 Hon. Mr. LANDRY— He did not go back 
 Into the fold. He wanted and he offered to 
 assist the Prime Minister and the hon. min- 
 ister r<>fu.sed his help. The hon. minister 
 may laugh, but Is there any reason In that 
 laughing ? Does he find bis smile an in- 
 telligent one ? 
 
 Hon. Mr. MILLS-Yes. 
 
 Hon. Mr. LANDRY— I am happy to hear 
 that the hon. Minister of Justice Is judge In 
 hia own case and that he finds when he 
 laughs that his smile is very intelligent. If 
 any one else does not give him that certifi- 
 cate, at least he finds in Ills conscience suffi- 
 cient to tell him that he is intelligent. Where 
 are the others who will find his similes so in- 
 telligent ? I tell the hon. gentleman that 
 the stand taken to-day by the ministry will 
 be ics own condemnation. They know they 
 'have not settled the question. They know 
 they have refused the opportunity they had 
 in their life to remedy the injustices perpe- 
 trated against the OathoiUcs of Manitoba. 
 The hon. gentleman might rise once more 
 and recite one of the chapters of the book 
 ihe has written on the Ti'ansvaal. He may 
 boast of the willingness of his go^'ernment 
 or of the country to run to the Transvaal 
 and take up arms and tight for the Uitland- 
 ers there. But we have Uitlandei-s here in 
 Manitoba, and before going abroad to find 
 •grievances to be redressed why did not the 
 government settle similar matters in this 
 country ? I was very much amused the 
 other day when the hon. minister said that 
 a burgher had been condemned to pay a flue 
 because he whipped a man. but that the 
 government had taken money out of the 
 public treasury to pay the fine at the ex- 
 pense of the public. But what do we see 
 in this country ? Nothing else, or nothing 
 less, when the ministers of the pre^^ut ad- 
 ministration are found remitting fines to 
 persons who have violated the law of the 
 Inland Revenue ? When they are remitting 
 such fines what are they doing ? They 
 are taking the public money to sup- 
 
 port their ofwn ifrlends and why ? Why 
 should a man who is writing history, who Is 
 supposed to have the calm Judgment of a 
 historian, should come here and make out 
 a great case against a foreign government 
 when he Is doing precisely the same thing ? 
 I hope that the government will aee its way 
 to do justice. I hope against all hope that 
 the government of the day, containing per- 
 sons who, one day, pretended themselves so 
 devoted to the interests of the minority, as 
 the hon. Secretary of State, the hon. Prime 
 Minister and the Minister of Public Works, 
 did on more than one occasion will find out 
 what are their present obligations and will 
 be able to fulfil them. Let us all hope that 
 if ever again a man like Sir Charles Tupper 
 offers to aid them they will not coonmlt the 
 blunder to refuse such a help. In 1896, 
 when the present administration came to 
 power, they were offered the best oppor- 
 tunity to settle that school question Imme- 
 diately and for ever. Sir Charles Tupper 
 had made of that school question a plank 
 of his platform when he went before the 
 people. The people who elected the sup- 
 porters of Sir Charles Tupper hac' elected 
 men who were naturally disposed to settle 
 that question as the law o£ the country in- 
 dicated, and these hon. gentlemen all were 
 in the House of Commons, when Sir Charles 
 Tuppei- offered his support and the support 
 of his party to settle that question. Not 
 a dissenting voice was heard. 1 say 
 that the government of the day committed 
 the greatest fault they could commit, in not 
 accepting the aid of Sir Charles Tupper and 
 of his party to settle that question defl'^itely. 
 The question is not settled, and it will not 
 be settled if justice is not done to the mi- 
 nority. It Is because they are a minority 
 and have rights tliat tlie majority Is bound 
 to give them full protection. I hope that the 
 people of this Dominion will see, not only by 
 the events which have taken place, but 
 especially by the answer given to-day by 
 the hon. Minister of Justice, that no justice 
 whatever will ever be rendered to them by 
 the Liberal party. Such is the puhllc de- 
 claration, made In this House to-day, by 
 a man who Is not, as his title should Indi- 
 cate, a distributor of justice, hut who Is 
 degrading his position In playing the mean 
 game of party interests.