IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-S)

f/.

^"(5
^

1.0

I.I

1.25

■^ ^ III 2.2

2.0

1.8

U IIIIII.6

/#
^

Photographic

Sciences

Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580

(716) 872-4503

%
J

'<i

5? ..W

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHM/ICMH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques

f
^

Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques

The institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available for filming. Features of this
copy which may be bibliographically unique,
which may alter any of the images in the
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked below.

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

I I Covers damaged/

Couverture endommagie

Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaur6e et/ou peiiiculie

I I Cover title missing/

Le titre de couverture manque

I I Coloured maps/

Cartes gdographiques en couleur

Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/

Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

Bound with other material/
Reli6 avec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La reliure sorriu peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge intirieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout6es
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
mais, iorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6t6 filmdes.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires supplimentalres:

The
to tl

L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a 4t6 possible de se procurer. Les details
de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du
point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une
r^odification dans la mAthode normale de filmage
tont indiquAs ci-dessous.

|~~| Coloured pages/

Pages de couleur

Pages damaged/
Pages endommag6es

Pages restored and/oi

Pages restaur6es et/ou pellicul6es

Pages discoloured, stained or foxe<
Pages ddcoiories. tacheties ou piqu^es

Pages detached/
Pages ddtachdes

Showthrough/
Transparence

Quality of prir

Quality in6gale de I'impression

Includes supplementary materii
Comprend du mat6riel suppiimentaire

I I Pages damaged/

{~~| Pages restored and/or laminated/

I ~1 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/

I I Pages detached/

r~^ Showthrough/

I I Quality of print varies/

I I Includes supplementary material/

The

POS!
of tl
film

Orig

begi

the

sion

othe

first

sion

or il

I — I Only edition available/

The
shai
TIN(
whi(

Map
diffe
entir
begii
right
requ
metl

Seule Edition disponible

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc.. have been ref limed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata. une pelure.
etc.. ont 6t6 filmies A nouveau de fa^on i
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est film^ au taux de reduction indiqui ci-dessous.

10X

14X

18X

22X

26X

30X

12X

16X

20X

24X

28X

32X

The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks
to the generosity of:

National Library of Canada

L'exemplaire film6 fut reprodult grSce d la
g6n6rosit6 de:

Biblioth^que nationale du Canada

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.

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 images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et
de la netteti de l'exemplaire film6, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprim6e sont filmds en commenpant
par 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 film6s 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 frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol -^ (meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la
dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le
cas: le symbole — »• 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 diff^rents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour §tre
reproduit en un seul ciichd, il est film6 d partir
de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche d droite,
et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la m6thode.

12 3

THE MANITOBA QUESTION

TBBE SIDE OF

Mr, Bodwell's Fallacies Exposed,

MR. JOSEPH MARTIN AND
HIS METHODS.

VICTORIA, B. C.

THE COLONIST STEAM PRESSES,

1896.

LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT

THE MANITOBA SCHOOL CASE.

A Reply to Mr. E. V. Bodwell's argument against

the School System in operation in Manitoba

prior to 1890, by A. E. McPhillips,

Barrister-at-Law.

Having carefully perused the printed reports of Mr. E. V.
Bodwell's political address, delivered at the Victoria theatre on
Thursday evening, December 26th, and realizing that such
an address distributed broadcast amongst those unfamiliar
with the true facts and circumstances of what is now known
throughout the Dominion as the Manitoba School Case, must
create a wholly false and distorted impression of this question,
I venture to submit to the electors of Victoria, B. C. , the fol-
lowing reply thereto; and I do so, believing firmly that all fair-
minded and patriotic men will, in honesty of purpose, be most
willing to receive and consider the true facts, and therefrom form
an opinion for therAselves instead of being led away by those
who seek merely to make political capital.

A. E. McPHILLIPS.

Mr. Bodwell has Not Done Himself Justice.

Mr. Bodwell has not done himself justice. He is a man of
great talent and of much originality, but, in his address on the
Manitoba School Question, instead of relying on his own re-
search and ability, he has contented himself with reproducing
the assertions of others, and, having relied upon their accuracy,
has involved himself in their untruths ; untruths which in the
place where originally uttered have been demonstrated time and
again. Here in Victoria they are comparatively new.

No Originality in His Arguments,

Mr. Bodwell's address has not an original argument in it.
It is the RE-VAMPING and re-arranging of pamphlets issued upon
the subject by self-serving politicians whose aims and objects
have been exposed over and over again.

His Quotations from Privy Council Proceedings.

Mr. Bodwell's quotation from the proceedings of the Privy
Council appeared in the opposition newspaper two or three
weeks before he used it. No lawyer would, as an argument,
quote those proceedings as an authority for any proposition.
As a lawyer, Mr. Bodwell would refer to the judgment itself for
anything authentic. The verbal remarks of counsel and judges
during the argument, made for the purpose of elucidating and
leading up to the judgment, form no part of the judgment.
They are not quotations from the judgment. Often remarks
interspersed during the argument, are modified or withdrawn.
Those who have attended our Courts here have seen instances
of that. Mr. Bodwell professes to give us extracts from the

proceedings in order to show that all decided was
"that construing the Manitoba Act technically and strictly
*• according to its language, the Governor-General had jurisdic-
"tiontohear the petitioners" — "nothing more." The Privy
Council saying in effect; — " You must investigate the matter,
" and if you find that, as statesmen, a gross injustice has been
" c 2, which has no other remedy, then you can, if you choose
* e a remedy, but you are not bound to do so."

The words quoted are Mr. Bodwell's exact language. They
infer, in fact, state plainly, that the Privy Council do not find
the minority to have any grievance, but leave the Governor-
General in Council to find out whether there is a grievance, and
if so, to say whether they will remedy it, or not. How untruth-
ful this statement is, is at once shown by reference, not to the
skirmishing conversations, but to the judgment itself, which
Mr. Bodwell carefully leaves out of sight.

An Accurate Quotation From the Judgment.

Lord Herchell: —

'* Contrast the position of the Roman Catholics prior to and
" subsequent to the Acts from which they appeal. Before these
" passed into law there existed denominational schools of which
" the control and management were in the hands of the Roman
"Catholics, who could select the books to be used and deter-
" mine the character of the religious teaching. These schools
" received their proportionate share of the money contributed
" for school purposes out of the general taxation of the Pro-

vince, and the money raised for these purposes by local assess-
ment was, so far as it fell upon Catholics, applied only to
Catholic schools. What is the position of the Roman Catho-
lic minority under the Acts of 1890? The schools of their
own denomination, conducted according to their views, will
rfceive no aid from the State. They must depend entirely
for their support upon the contributions of the Catholic com-
munity, while the taxes out of which the State aid is granted
to the schools provided for by the Statute, fall upon Catholics
and Protestants. Moreover, while the Catholic inhabitants
remain liable to local assessment for school purposes, the pro-
ceeds of the assessment are no longer destined to any extent
for the support of the Catholic schools, but afford the means
of maintaining schools which they regard as no more suitable
for the education of Catholic children than if they were of a
distinctly Protes^nt character."

Suppressed by Mr. Bodwell.

By suppressing all mention of the judgment of their Lord-
ships, Mr. Bodwell argues that the Government were not forced
to act. Saying that they were not forced to act means, of
course, that there was no peremptory, or valid reason shown
why, as honest interpreters of the Constitution, they should
act. In a physical sense the Government were not forced to
act. But, in a moral sense, they were bound to act when the
rights of the minority were shown to be affected, and that they
wereaffectf"', and how deeply, is shown by the above quotation,
and, as if 10 emphasize it, their Lordships go on to say : —

" In view of this comparison, it does not seem possible to
** SAY THAT THE RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES of the Roman CathoHc
'* minority in relation to education which existed prior to 1890
*' have not been affected."

Rights and privileges then having found by the highest
tribunal in the land to have been affected, and injuriously
affected, by the Legislation complained of, the law speaks with
no uncertain sound. Here is what it says : —

Manitoba Act Sec. 22. '* In and for the province the said
" Legislature may exclusively make laws in relation to edu-
" cation, subject and according to the following provisions : —

" (i). Nothing in any such law shall prejudicially affect
" any right or privilege with respect to denominational schools
"which any class of persons have by law or practice in the
*' province at the Union : —

" (2). An appeal shall lie to the Governor-General in Coun-
" cil from any act or decision of the Legislature of the

''ma^'i

** Province, or of any provincial authority, affecting any right
"or privilege of the Protestant or Roman Catholic minority of
** the Queen's subjects in relation to education."

" But, " says Mr. Bodwell," all that says is that the Govern-
*' ment were bound to hpar the appeal, not to grant any, and, as
'* matter of fact, they ought to have granted no relief, for the
•* schools before the Act were inefficient, and disioyalty incul-
" cated as one of the leading features of the separate school
*' system."

I will deal with the questions of inefficiency and disloyalty
in a moment, but first let me refer a moment to the contention
that with a just cause of appeal existing, the Governor in Coun-
cil was not forced to give effect to it.

Government not Forced to Giv^ Relief.

Such an assertion shocks every sense of morality and
honesty. It is the argument of the bandit and robber.
As well might you argue that although the law says
that it shall be lawful for a Court of Justice to restore to me
my watch which has been filched from me, and to punish the
marauder, yet the Court is not forced to do anything. It is only
lawful for them to do it, and they can do as they please, or as
policy dictates. That is Mr. Bodwell's argument in a nutshell.
But, as every honest man can see, the jurisdiction and duty of
hearing the appeal carries with it the imperative obligation also
to grant redress if the appeal is well founded, and that the
appeal is well founded, is declared by their Lordships in the
language above quoted, and by their express finding in apt
language, the appeal is well founded."

Then, following the decision that the rights of the minority
have been affected and that the appeal is well' founded ; their
Lordships go on to say : "It is not for this tribunal to inti-
*• mate the precise steps to be taken. Their general character
«' is sufficiently defined by the 3rd sub-section of the Manitoba
"Act."

Here is the 3rd sub-section which their Lordships thns
invoke : —

" (3.) In case any such Provincial Law, as from time to
*' time seems to the Governor-General in Council requisite for
*• the due execution of the provisions of this section is not made,
"or in case any decision of the Governor-General in Coun-
"cil on any appeal under this section is not duly executed
" by the proper Provincial Authority in that behalf, then, and
" in every such case, and as far only as the circumstances of
*' each case . require, the Parliament of Canada may make

'• remedal laws for the due execution of the provisions of this
'* section, and of any decision of the Governor-General in Coun-
** cil under this section."

No Occasion to Re-Enact the Statute of 1890.

Their Lordships then proceed: — ''It is certainly not
ESSENTIAL that the Statntes repealed by the Act of 1890 should
be re-enacted, or that the precise provisions of those Statutes
should again be made law. ■* * * ♦ ♦ ♦

All legitimate ground for complaint would be removed if the
system was supplemented by provisions which would remove
the grievance upon which the appeal is founded, and if it
were modified so far as might be necessary to give effect to
those provisions."

Not Forced to Act.

Mr. Bod well : "Never let it be said again in the City of
" Victoria during this election that the Government were forced
"to act." (Cheers.)

Her Majesty's Judgment of the Privy Council: — "Her
Majesty having taken the said report in consideration was
pleased by and with the advice of Her Privy Council to ap-
prove thereof, and to order, as it is hereby ordered, that the
recommendations and directions therein contained be punc-
tually observed, obeyed and carried into effect, in each and
every particular — Whereof the Governor-General of the
Dominion of Canada for the time being, and all other persons
whom it may concern, are to take notice and govern them-
selves accordingly."

How does Mr. Bodwell's statement, and the judgment of
Her Majesty's Privy Council of England, agree ?

Inefficient Education.

Let us now look into the statement that it was established
beyond a doubt that the separate schools as means of education
were woefully deficient ; that the examinations set for teachers
were of such a character as not to require any of the peculiar
qualifications of a teacher, and it was also proved that the
characters of the teachers as students were not such as to give
any reasonable hope that that state of things would be remedied
in the future ; that a most deplorable state of illiteracy was
found amongst the people themselves ; that in very many cases
in petitions sent into the Legislature, more than half of the
signers were unable to write their names, and so on.

In the first place, if all this, and a great deal more, has, as
Mr. Bod well asserts, " been established beyond a doubt" it

answers the suggestion said to have been made by the Provin-
cial Government but not in fact made " of a commission to
investigate the facts," for, apparently the investigation had
already been made. But, even assuming all to be as Mr. Bod-
well states, no reason is given for depriving. the minority of their
constitutional rights. If the schools were inefficient, reform
them, raise their standard and see it complied with. Mr. Bod-
well tells us that nothing short of a return to the system as it
existed before rSQo, would suit the Catholic minority, and that
the Remedial Order distinctly directs a return to that system.
Each of these statements is directly contrary to the fact.

No Church Control of Schools.

At the hearing of the Appeal before the Governor-General
in Council, Mr. Ewart, as Counsel for the Roman Catholic min-
ority, in addressing the Council, said :

'•They do not ask that their church should in any
♦• way control the schools. They are perfectly willing
"to work up to any state prescribed standard of secu-

•* LAR instruction, TO BE SUBJECTED TO INSPECTION, AND TO
•' USE SCHOOL BOOKS NOT AT VARIANCE WITH THEIR RELIGIOUS
•• DOCTRINES."

In fact, as is well known, Catholics are perfectly willing to
be bound by, and are anxious to co-operate in every arrange-
ment necessary for the secular, if thought well, the compulsory
education, of children in Manitoba, All that they ask is that
they shall have the privilege of teaching religion — not to others
— but to their own children. This is a matter of conscience
with them — are not their conscientious convictions to be respect-
ed, when the constitution says they shall be so ? As for the
statement that the Remedial Order distinctly directs a return to
the system in force before 1890 — it does nothing of the kind !
On the contrary the judgment says distinctly : "It is certainly
not essential that the Statutes repealed by the Act of 1890 should
be re-enacted, or that the precise provisions of these Statutes
should again be made law."

Mr. Bodwell says :

IS A Question of
a question of expediency, one

Politics."

•* It is a question of expediency, one of debate between
** two classes of people that are found in every province, those
*' who believe in secular education in the public school, and
'• those who do not ; and in the ordinary course of things, and
•' in accordance with the universal rule that governs British law,
•' this is pre-eminently a question in which the majority should
*♦ rule."

I differ with him. This \h not a question of potiticH. It is
a question of constitutional ri^^ht, and of Kettled law, which says,
not that this question, which is one of conscience, shall be
decided by the majority, but that : (s. aa, ss. i.)

*' Nothing in any such law sha! prejudicially affect any right
" or privilege with respect to denominational schools which any
•• class of persons have by law or practice in the Province at the
** union," and further if this provision is over-ridden there shall
be an appeal, not to the majority, but to the power, which is
bound to protect the pieanest subject — the Governor-General,
representing the Queen, in Council.

Apply Mr. Bodwell's argument to the Province of Quebec,
where the majority are Catholic, but where the Protestant min-
ority are protected by a section in the B. N. A. Act similar to
section 22 of the Mahitoba Act. Suppose the question to be
raised there of abolishing separate Protestant schools, and of
having but one system of Ct'*holic public school education.
Apply Mr. Bodwell's argument to that state of affairs : " It is a
•* question of expediency. One of debate between two classes
•' of people, those who believe in Catholic public education and
'• those who do not, and in accordance with the universal rule
•• that governs British law, that is pre-eminently a question in
*• which the msjority should rule."

What an enormity it would be in Quebec, that the parents
of every Protestant child must submit to hi? child
being indoctrinated with Roman Catholicism ! What a
hideous tyranny, and flagrant violation of the Constitu-
tion ! And yet the counterpart of such tyaanny and
violation of constitutional rights, Mr. Bodwell's argument
would inflict on the Catholic child in another province. What
in the Province of Quebec, would the Protestant father have to
say to Mr. Bodwell's further point . " There is nothing against
any denomination establishing and supporting their own de-
nominational schools, but they would receive no state aid."
The parent would ask, and with irresistible force, why was he
taxed to support Roman Catholic schools to which he could not
conscientiously send his child, and, as for establishing his own
denominational schools, why he had not the money to do so,
and pay taxes towards state schools as well.

Mr. Bodwell, and many others, would laugh to scorn the
possibility of such a state of things in Quebec. Why ?
Because Canadians of other provinces, and British subjects
everywhere, would rise en masse against it, and Quebec, too
weak to enforce such a system, would be alone in the struggle.
But to the honest mind, which does not proceed upon the prin-

ciple of mere might constituting right, there would be nothing
more revolting in Quebec's tyrannical attempt to control
conscience by an invasion of constitutional right than in the
case of Manitoba. The mere fact that in the one case Catholic
rights were encroached upon, and in the other, Protestant,
would be no feature in the case. How, in the Quebec case, if
the Dominion interfered, would such cries sound as " Hands

off
&c.

Quebec " ?
&c.

No coercion"? "Let Quebec alone"?

WHERE THE COERCION COMES IN.

As Mr. Helmcken, Q.C., remarked the other evening, the
coercion is not of Manito'^a, but bv Manitoba of a minority
which is supposed to be weak ; but the Constitution is the pro-
tection of the minority. The majority require no constitution.

"'' Inefficiency Refuted.

But what truth is there in this charge of inefficiency ? I
will quote from an article by Mr. Ewart, Q.C., in the Toronto
Mail, of 15th June last. He says: "The charges of
" inefficiency brought against the former Catholic schools have
" been answered so often and so completely that nothing but a
" charitable attribution to the Manitoba Government of
" monomania can save frcSm very serious characterization its
" statement that * so far as we are aware there has never been
" an attempt made to defend these schools on their merits.' "
After referring to several of the more public refutations of in-
efficiency, the writer goes on to say : "In fact there has not
" been the slightest difficulty in answering all that has been put
" forward as charges of inefficiency. The allegations are of
"three kinds: (i). Those which are perfectly true, but also
" utterly irrelevant, and would be just as useful to prove the
"inefficiency of the sun to penetrate the walls of a dungeon.
" (2). Those which are specific, but untrue. (3). Those which
"are so general that they are rather villiiication than
•' allegation."

"Among those which are true, but irrevelant, the principal
one is that very many of the French half-breeds are illiterate.
In the United States where there are no separate schools, the
illiteracy amongst the civilized Indians, Chinese, Negroes, etc.,
is so great that a separate column is made for them in the edu-
cational census. Is this an argument in favor of establishing
separate schools in the States ? Does it prove the inefficiency
of their system of education ? If not, why does the partial illi-
teracy of halt-breeds, who during their present generation were
roving bands of hunters, and whose mother tongue is Cree,

prove anything* against the Catholic schools in Manitoba ? Let
the Catholics be admired for the noble work they have done as
missionaries, instructors and civilizers among the nomads of the
prairies ; and not be traduced or their work belittled by dwel-
ling upon the fact that every nomad is not yet a scholar."

" Amongst the charges that are specific, but are untrue, is
the allegation that in these Catholic schools catechism is the
principal subject of instruction. At the close of my recent
lecture in Winnipeg I produced the time-tables from five Catho-
lic schools and asked everyone to see for himself the baselessness
of this charge. Further, I gave in the name of the Catholics, a
cordial invitation to all to visit the schools at any time they
wished. It is needless, perhaps, to add that although no one
came, the charge is still supposed to be so true as not only to be
unanswered, but to be wholly incapable of answer."

'* Another specific charge is that under the old system the
Catholics cooked their return so as to increase their share of
the taxes. This charge has now become a general one, for the
reason that upon the only occasion upon which it was made
specific, it was proved to be unttue, and that in the most satis-
factory way possibly, namely, by the finding of the Court of
Queen's Bench. The charge then was specific. It was made
as to the city of Winnipeg. It was proved to be false. Since
then it has become, as I say, general, and has taken to the
woods. "

"Another specific charge is that the examination of teachers
was a farce. This has been supported by quoting one out of
several papers set for a teacher's examination, and then speak,
ing of it as Mr. Armour does, as though it had been the only
one required to be answered. Mr. Armour should be more
careful."

" The general charges are, as I have said, rather vilifications
than allegations. To meet them one can do little more than ask
for particulars, and meanwhile give flat denial. At my recent
lecture I did all that was possible to remove misapprehension by
producing upon the platform for general inspection a large ex-
hibit of the ordinary work of the Catholic school children by
asking the audience to visit the schools, and by announcing the
fact that in one of the Winnipeg Catholic schools there were on
that day no fewer than 44 Protestant scholars, whose parents
would rather pay for the benefits of the "inefficiency" of a
Catholic school than partake of the excellence of the public
schools for nothing."

In Mr. Ewart's lecture, to which he refers, (given in the
Congregational Church of the City of Winnipeg), he remarks: —

Perhaps the best means of ascertaining whether' the separate
schools system is injurious, is to ascertain how it works in
Ontario. There the supporters of both systems are much the
same, and the conditions are identical. How does it operate
there ? Are the separate schools there illiterate ? If you will
turn to the Canadian Statistical Year Book for 1894, at page
851, you will find the statement: ' The average attendances at
the separate schools were better than at the public schools,
being 57 per cent, of the total number of pupils, while the
average cost of a pupil, both on total attendance and on
average attendance, was less than the public schools.' "

Further Testimony Refuting Inefficiency.

Now, let me give another testimony, that of Capt. W.
Clarke, who, at the time he wrote the letter given below, was
the Manitoba representative at the Colonial and Indian Exhibi-
tion. Mr. Clarke is not a Catholic, nor has he any tendencies
toward Rome, but, through his daughters he acquired some
knowledge of a Catholic school in Manitoba, and so was pre-
pared to acknowledge without surprise the merit of their ex-
hibit. Read his testimony : —

London, 27th July, 1886.

'* Dear Sir, — I can speak with experience with reference to
** the excellence of your section, two of my daughters having
'* been for a long time with the good sisters of St. Boniface,
'* where their progress was as satisfactory to me as it was plea-
** sant to me,"

" I am, sir,

" Your obedient servant,

" William Clarke."

"7'. A. Berm'er, jasg.^ Sup/, of Education.^'

Read also the testimony of Canada's Hlt;h Commissioner
in the same year (1886), long before the questions which now
rend society had arisen :

"Colonial and Indian Exhibition, i886.
"Canadian Section,

'• London, 29th June, 1896.
" To T. H. Bemier, Esq.:

"My Dear Sir, — I duly received your letter of the 3rd
" inst., and have to thank you for the memorandum which you
" have prepared on behalf of your section of the Manitoba
" Educational Exhibit. I shall be pleased to receive a thousand

" copies of the memorandum and to see that they are carefully
" distributed. The exhibit which you have taken such pains to
" collect has already attracted considerable attention, and I do
" not doubt it will add to the success of the Dominion at the
*' Exhibition.

•♦ I remain, Yours faithfully,

" Charles TuppER. "

If you are not satisfied with such testimonies, listen to the
following remarks published in the "Canadian Gazette" of
London, on the 4th November, 1886 :

" It is generally believed that of all the sister provinces,
** that of Manitoba is the least advanced towards civilizadon.
*' We already know, that in many respects, such is not the
*' case, but if we consider the excellent scholastic exhibition
**of that province, we see in what degree that impression is
*' erroneous, especially in the matter of education.

"The collection contains samples of books, exercises,
scholastic material, etc., etc, coming from the Catholic
SCHOOLS as well as from the Protestant schools of the
province.

'* The excellency of the work, and especially of the geogra-
phical charts is incontestible. This is the more pleasing, if
we consider the fact that many exhibits are dated from the
year 1884, and the beginning of the year 1885. It is evident
the exhibit is composed of the ordinary duties of the schools
in all parts of the province, and not of work specially pre-
pared for the occasion.

" No pretention has been made to eclipse the school exhib-
its of the other provinces, but the collection that is under our
eyes denotes that in one of the most recently ' organized '
provinces of the Confederation, there exists a school
system, which although respecting the faith and religious
convictions of the population, offers to everyone an edu-
cation capable of fitting for the highest rank in the
society, thu child who is placed under its care."

What Patriotism Dictates.

Mr. Bodwell goes on to tell us of the purely anti-British
tendency of the teaching in the former Manitoba separate
schools. English not taught, and children ignorant of British
history and traditions and teaching being anti-British in every
sense of the word, and Mr. Bodwell closes with the following
peroration : —

4«
H
««
<<
II
II

II
II
II
II
«l
41
*t

t4
l<

<i
i<
<(
((
((
i<
4t
<i
(»
(I
t<
<<
l<

, Mr. Bodwell's Peoration.

*' Will Col. Prior force on the people of Manitoba a system
which will leave a large part of the population ignorant of the
glories and achievements of British arms in the past. To
whom the names of Waterloo and Balaclava will be unmean-
ing terms ; who will never hear of the relief of Lucknow, or
the glorious day of Alma. Whose pulses will never be stirred
by the heroism of Wolfe, or the reckless daring of Brock.
How, step by step, under the growth of British institutions,
often amid tears of privation and bloodshed, the divine right
of kings was made' subordinate to the greater rights of the
people. Of the United Empire Loyalists, of their struggles
and adherence to the British Crown, and how, out of the
ilames and ashes of that bitter martyrdom there has arisen in
this Canada of ours a system of constitutional rights, or edu-
cational privileges, of freedom of thought, and liberty of con-
science, which is to-day the admiration of the world."

All this highly inflammatory material from a gentleman
who assures us "we make no appeals to passion," demon-
strates to the intelligent listener, who has just heard this display
of fireworks, that an endeavor to appeal to the passions of the
uninformed is exactly what the speaker is attempting. The
reference to constitutional rights and educational privileges from
one who is appealing to the blind passions and prejudices of his
hearers to ride roughshod over these very constitutional rights
and educational privileges, is a sad commentary on the con-
sistency of the human mind. This gentleman must have im-
bibed the principles of Mr. Templeman, when in a moment of
disappointment at losing his election five years ago, he an-
nounced his opinion that the public were no longer to be swayed
by reason, but practiced only only by the methods of the bunco
steerer. Are these the methods now to be employed in this
campaign, in the absence of legitimate subjects for appeals to
reason ? Why is it that all the broad principles of Liberalism,
" Free trade as they have it in England." " Tariff for revenue
only," and so on, are almost entirely given the go-by in this con-
test, and all efforts centred on a cry which can only have the
effect of sowing religious hate and bigotry ?

What is the use of this outcry for Provincial rights, and
against French domination, when, in reference to the Jesuits
Estates Act, these people, with Dalton McCarthy at their head,
were prepared to over-ride every Provincial right ; and, in the
Riel case, headed by Laurier, were prepared to rend the Do-
minion in shreds, so as to gain sympat|iy and support from a
horde who objected to the righteous punishment of a French
Rebel ?

Disloyalty in Teaching.

Now, as to " Disloyalty in Teaching," and neglect of Eng-
lish History, the obvious answer is, that given to the charge of
inefficiency. If it exists, let the Government remedy it ; they
are responsible for the proper conduct of the schools, whether
denominational or secular. As pointed out before, the Church
does not ask to control the schools, and the Catholics are per-
fectly willing to work up to any State prescribed standard of
instruction, to be subject to inspection, and to use school books
not at variance with their religious doctrines.

What more can be asked than this, even if all Mr. Bodwell's
appeal to prejudice and passion is true. But that it is not true,
but wholly false, is demonstrated by the fact that no proof of
anything of the kind was offered by the Manitoba Government
during the four days when their case was argued before the
Dominion Government by Dalton McCarthy, nor has th^re been
any proof offered since then by the government, or by any one
else. There is not the remotest truth in it.

THE BILL OF RIGHTS.

Mr. Bodwell says that in the original Bill of Rights which
preceded Confederation no mention is made of separate schools,
and therefore, he argues. Catholics are not entitled to them.

But Mr. BOdwell's premises do not warrant his conclusion .
Regarding the Bill of Rights he tells us that a "great public
" meeting was held and delegates appointed to draw up a Bill
" of Rights, which was afterwards sent to Ottawa, and which
•' formed the foundation of the compact by which Manitoba
*' afterwards came into Confederation. In that Bill of Rights,
'* from beginning to end, there was no mention of separate
"schools."

Assuming what Mr. Bodwell says to be the fact, what has
it to do with the case ? The so-called " Bill of Rights " was
but a preliminary draft of what afterwards was formulated as
the "Manitoba Act," and it is idle to speculate on what may,
or may not have been 'eft out of the draft. The thing which
speaks is the Act of Parliament, finally assented to by all
parties: Confirmed by the British Parliament: Worked under for
20 years, and unques*^ioned in any way until now. The Manitoba
Act is perfectly clear on the subject of denominationol schools,
clearer even than the British North America Act which applies
to Ontario and Quebec, and which protects separate schools

ONLY WHEN ESTABLISHED BY LAW BEFORE OR SINCE THE UnION,

whereas the Manitoba Act recognizes those established either
by law OR practice.

As a matter of fact there were pour bills of rights for
MANITOBA, formulated before the Manitoba Act. The point of
genuineness turns only upon the fourth Bill of Rights, which,
even if it could be proved a forgery, would not alter the case.
At least, the second and third Bills of Rights contained distinct
protection of the rights and privileges of the people in regard
to schools before Confederation.

So, even without the fourth bill over which dispute as to
genuineness has arisen, it is perfectly clear that all existing edu-
cational rights and privileges were to be respected. But as
pointed out before, the question is not, what was contained in
in either of the Bill of Rights, which have all, long since passed
out of existence, but what is contained now, in the constitution,
"The Manitoba Act,"

" Hands off Manitoba. What is Manitoba's case to-
-day MAY BE British Columbia's case to-morrow."

This loud sounding, but hollow cry, was not made use of
by Mr. Bodwell, but is a favorite one with some other speakers.
It is utterly misleading.

The constitution and circumstances applicable to British Co-
lumbia are entirely different from Manitoba. The Manitoba Act
does not apply to us. With us, the only Constitutional pro-
vision in relation to denominational or separate schools, is sec-
tion 93 of the British North America Act.

93. In and for the province the Legislature may exclusively
make laws in relation to education, subject and according to the
following provisions :

(i). Nothing in any such law shall prejudically affect any
right or privilege which any class of persons have by law in

THE province AT THE UNION.

{3). Where in any province a system of separate or dissen-
tient schools exists by law at the union, or is thereafter

ESTABLISHED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE PROVINCE, an appeal

shall lie to the Governor-General in Council from any act or
decision of any provincial authority affecting any right or privi-
lege of the Protestant or Roman J^Catholic minority of the
Queen's subjects, in relation to education.

The Union consummated by the B. N. A. Act wasjonly of
Upper and Lower Canada, now known as Ontario and Quebec,
and of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and the only privileges
in respect of separate schools to be respected, were "those
" EXISTING BY LAW AT THE UNION, or thereafter established by
" the legislature of the province."

Can be no Separate Scho'^i.s in British Columbia.

Some five or six years after the Union, the question arose
in New Brunswick, whether the Catholics were entitled to
separate schools, and the question was litigated, first in the
Supreme Court of the province, and afterwards in the Privy
Council in Enp-land, and both tribuuals arrived at the same
conclusion, wuich was that no such right existed under the
sections of the British North American Act above quoted. The
Catholics in vain pointed to the separate schools which had "by
practice " existed in New Brunswick before Confederation.
The Courts said, " That will not do. You must have them not
*• 'by practice' but by law," and in order to have them by law,
they must exist by " positive legal enactement ;"

And, as there was no "positive legal enactment" at the
Union, or by the Local Legislature since the Union, establish-
ing separate schools, the Catholics lost their case and were held
to be entitled to no privilege of separate schools. New Bruns-
wick's CASE is precisely THAT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA.

British Columbia had no separate schools or denominational
privileges whatever before Confederation. It has established
none itself since, and hence no question whatever of Dominion
Legislation or interference, upon the subject, can possibly arise.
And, as for separate schools in other Provinces, in which they
are established by law, or which have adopted them voluntarily,
that is none of British Columbia's concern, and there is no reason
whatever why any such mischievous, venomous question shouH
be imported into polilics here, where we have hitherto been free
of It, and ALL creeds and denominations live happily
together.

They get along together also in Ontario and Quebec where
they have separate schools, giving a system of education second
to none in the world, and so they would in Manitoba, if it were
not that the busy-bodies set people by the ears. Don't let them
do the same thing in British Columbia. Mr. Martin told the
people at New Westminster the other day that the issue of this
election is not whether British Columbia or Victoria was to
have Cabinet representation, but whether separate schools are
to be re-establislicd in Manitoba. There is no such issue

here.

LET MR. MARTIN KNOW IT.

A. E. McPhillips.